[Numpy-discussion] Fortran was dead ... [was Re:rewriting NumPy code in C or C++ or similar]
william ratcliff
william.ratcliff@gmail....
Wed Mar 16 16:14:39 CDT 2011
Related to this, what is the status of fwrap? Can it be used with fortran
95/2003 language features? There is a rather large code crystallographic
codebase (fullprof) that is written in fortran 77 that the author has been
porting to fortran 95/2003 and actually using modules for. I'd like to
write python bindings for it to make it more scriptable...
William
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 3:33 PM, <baker.alexander@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My two pence worth, my experience is across python, C++ and fortran (and a
> few other languages) and the posts here are interesting and relevant. I
> think that the true value of any of these languages is knowing any of them
> well, if you happen to work with other folks who share the same skills more
> the better. No more than that.
>
> As a user of a very old large very fortran codebase as well as engineer of
> more structured approaches, I would take the OO toolset everytime, for
> reasons already covered.
>
> The real challenge I see every day in scientific community is the lack of
> software craftmanship skills, code archiving, unit testing. End of two
> pence.
>
> Alex
> Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dag Sverre Seljebotn <d.s.seljebotn@astro.uio.no>
> Sender: numpy-discussion-bounces@scipy.org
> Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:12:21
> To: Discussion of Numerical Python<numpy-discussion@scipy.org>
> Reply-To: Discussion of Numerical Python <numpy-discussion@scipy.org>
> Subject: Re: [Numpy-discussion] Fortran was dead ... [was Re:
> rewriting NumPy code in C or C++ or similar]
>
> On 03/16/2011 08:10 PM, Ravi wrote:
> > On Monday 14 March 2011 15:02:32 Sebastian Haase wrote:
> >> Sturla has been writing so much about Fortran recently, and Ondrej now
> >> says he has done the move from C/C++ to Fortran -- I thought Fortran
> >> was dead ... !? ;-)
> >> What am I missing here ?
> > Comparing Fortran with C++ is like comparing Matlab with Python. Fortran
> is
> > very good at what it does but it does not serve the same audience as C++.
> The
> > typical comparisons work like this:
>
> <snip>
>
> I think the main point being made by most here though is that *in
> combination with Python*, Fortran can be quite helpful. If one is using
> Python anyway for the high-level stuff, the relative strengths of C++
> w.r.t. Fortran that you list become much less important. Same for
> code-reuse: When only used from a Python wrapper, the Fortran code can
> become so simplistic that it also becomes reusable.
>
> Dag Sverre
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
> _______________________________________________
> NumPy-Discussion mailing list
> NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org
> http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.scipy.org/pipermail/numpy-discussion/attachments/20110316/54a6185c/attachment.html
More information about the NumPy-Discussion
mailing list