[clean-list] Clean and scientific programming
Thu, 30 Aug 2001 16:25:34 +0200
Siegfried Gonzi wrote:
> Jan Kort wrote:
> > In case you didn't read it yet, this is an interesting paper:
> > http://www.acm.org/pubs/citations/proceedings/supercomputing/125826/p264-cann/
> Thank you for the hint, but I do not have access.Transmitting USD 3.- is
> not a choice because the expense would be USD 20.-.
> What has been the proposition of the article?
> S. Gonzi
Sorry, I didn't know you had to pay for it..
The article is called "Retire Fortran? A debate rekindled" .
It's a followup to an earlier debate where the conclusion was
that Fortran was a bad thing but "Fortran and only Fortran
provided the performance needed for large-scale scientific computing".
Cann reopens the debate in this article by pitting Sisal
against Fortran. Sisal more or less destroys Fortran.
Although Sisal is dead, the results are still significant:
they show that there is a feature for functional
languages in scientific computing. I am not sure which
implementation research focusses on now, maybe single
assignment C ?
 Retire Fortran? A debate rekindled, David Cann, Pages 264-272
ACM Proceedings of the 1991 conference on Supercomputing, November
18 - 22, 1991, Albuquerque, NM USA