Date: Sat, 27 May 2006 00:51:55 -0400 From: Anish Mistry <mistry.7@osu.edu> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Mike Jakubik <mikej@rogers.com>, Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> Subject: Re: [RFC] Removal of Fortran from the base system Message-ID: <200605270052.07850.mistry.7@osu.edu> In-Reply-To: <38C8392F-C345-41F7-A879-6C2F5D2C59F5@orthanc.ca> References: <20060527024407.GA2525@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <4477C401.2080307@rogers.com> <38C8392F-C345-41F7-A879-6C2F5D2C59F5@orthanc.ca>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Friday 26 May 2006 23:26, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > On May 26, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Mike Jakubik wrote: > > Agreed, who the hell still uses Fortran? > > I have great gobs of RF design and analysis code that is written in > F77 (and 66 for that matter). In the RF engineering field the > Fortran versions of Spice and friends are still quite popular. And > I know more than a handful of physicists who will never write a > line of C code, and nor should they, since their existing Fortran > tools are perfectly viable. A lot of these people rely on the > system shipping a Fortran compiler -- they're scientists, not > sysadmins. And believe me ... there IS a difference! (Now the > physics guys would be tickled pink if the system compiler was > upgraded to F95 or better ;-) I don't personally use Fortran, but I know a lot of engineers that do. Though they use a much more recent version than Fortran 77. I'd vote for removing it if it will make the import easier, but one or more Fortran compilers in the ports would need to be on the disc1 install ISO. -- Anish Mistry [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQBEd9r3xqA5ziudZT0RAp12AJ4lHmYq9THnAU80rqez0uYJpT5zQwCg3ybK /pB5mbaXTL14wItCIRFPeeU= =jeqK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200605270052.07850.mistry.7>