Re: The joy of FORTRAN

On 3/7/25 3:49 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:

On Fri, 7 Mar 2025 02:53:01 -0500
c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
 

On 3/6/25 2:14 PM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 06/03/2025 16:55, Dan Cross wrote:

In article <Martin-20250306163721@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>,
Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:

cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote or quoted:

That describes Martin's books to a T, I think.  He writes very
well, but what he writes, maybe not so much.

>
   I first got to know Robert on Usenet, in comp.objects. Later, I read
   something in his book about the difference between object-oriented
   and structured, which hits the nail on the head regarding the
   crucial point about which of the two paradigms has what advantages.
   At least 99 percent of people who talk about this topic don't get
   this point. That's why Robert is head and shoulders above Herbert
   in my book - even if Martin might make the occasional mistake.

>
I mean, two times something that is very close to zero is still
very close to zero.  :-)
>
     - Dan C.
>

No, its *twice as far away* from zero.

>
    Ok ... that CAN be a valid way of looking at it !  :-)
>
    But "still almost ZERO" also is.
>
    Just wondering ... this thread has drifted vastly
    towards old mainframes/minis that haven't existed
    for a LONG time and never will again. Whatever
    skills/experiences we had with them - great fun, but
    obsolete to the extreme except as "historical interest".

 I guess that's why afc is in the xpost to colm

   Well, this stuff is, or SHOULD BE, of "general
   interest".
   But, I have certain doubts.

    Very carefully applied, some of those Old Lessons MIGHT
    inform Future Developments. Alas, arrogance/blindness
    maybe, often DON'T. With computers, only the last 5
    years seems REAL to most. A very narrow window. As
    such little is learned from the past.

 

   Lots of humbug ......... what's new ?