On Feb 8, 2010, at 7:32 PM, N0body H0me wrote:
Here, here. The thing that impressed me about FORTRAN
(well, as
as science major, anyway) was that it could do complex numbers as
a *NATIVE* datatype!! Now, I know for you OOP and C++ guys, custom,
exotic datatypes are a dime a dozen. But in 1980, I was sure glad
I could do complex math without all of the extra baggage that would
have been necessary if I had to use, say, BASIC-Plus.
Yeah, but how often do those C++ custom exotic datatypes map to
real datatypes supported by the hardware? (in other words, which
ones will actually be FAST?)
That's certainly an issue. I wonder how many applications are
slower and more overweight due to their being crafted with OOP than
they would be if they were coded using more traditional methods.
"More traditional methods"? Just "the way processors execute
code" would be a good start. Processors aren't object-oriented in
nature. This is one of the reasons why we have computers with multi-
GHz processors that barely get out of their own way. The constructs
commonly used in OO programming don't come anywhere close to mapping
to hardware efficiently.
Our school didn't have a float point unit on our
PDP-11; I was
*certain* that DEC's FORTRAN compiler could generate much faster
code than anything I could bodge together using BASIC (of any stripe),
and I could code it in less time.
Indeed. What model of -11 was it? My first PDP-11, an 11/34a
around 1985 or so, came with an FP-11A. I spent many a late night
hacking on fun stuff like fractal algorithms and such, much to my
grandmother's annoyance. It'd be 2AM on a school night, she'd trudge
by my bedroom door in her slippers and bathrobe, and I'd look up from
my terminal and see her glaring at me, her annoyed face illuminated
only by the "ready" lights of the RL02s and RK07, and the KY11-LB
displays on the 11/34a. The FP-11A was one of my favorite parts of
that system.
My principal fascination with FORTRAN from the
beginning, was
that it had this 'purpose built' feature to easily handle complex
math (and it did it quite well, IIRC). I have great respect for
individuals who insist on purpose-built tools.
It was built to solve problems that often involved complex
numbers. I respect it for the same reason. I'm also impressed with
it because it's *fast* for Big Math.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL