[Info-vax] Programming languages on VMS

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Den 2018-01-24 kl. 17:47, skrev DaveFroble:
> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> On 01/24/2018 10:36 AM, DaveFroble wrote:
>>> John Reagan wrote:
>>>> On Wednesday, January 24, 2018 at 8:49:22 AM UTC-5, Paul Sture wrote:
>>>>> On 2018-01-24, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 1/23/2018 3:17 PM, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <p45v88$1u3q$1 at gioia.aioe.org>, =?UTF-8?Q?Arne_Vajh=c3=b8j?=
>>>>>>> <arne at vajhoej.dk> writes:
>>>>>>>> Languages needed for old stuff:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Fortran - HP/VSI, will be ported
>>>>>>>> Languages needed for new stuff:
>>>>>>> Hey!  One can write new code in Fortran!
>>>>>> You can.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But if you look at 1000 new applications how many of them will
>>>>>> actually be in Fortran?
>>>>> If you look at the scientific and High Performance world, Fortran
>>>>> is still in use.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is of course lots of existing Fortran 77 code, but Fortran 77
>>>>> apparently still has a distinct performance advantage over later
>>>>> versions, so it is used for new programs as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>> My guess: most likely none, maybe one or two.
>>>>> Probably more if you confine your search to the sector which uses
>>>>> Fortran already.
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> In 1911, Hollerith's firm was merged with several other producers of
>>>>> specialized business equipment to produce CTR, the Computing-Tabulating
>>>>> -Recording Company. The "Computing" part referred to weighing scales -
>>>>> an interesting example of how language evolves over time.
>>>>
>>>> There is a new Fortran frontend for LLVM named 'flang'.
>>>> https://github.com/flang-compiler/flang
>>>>
>>>
>>> John, you know a bit about languages.  Let me ask a question.
>>>
>>> I'll preface the question by admitting that I view much of the "new 
>>> languages" as some people who just want to "re-invent the wheel".
>>>
>>> Do the "new languages" actually present more and better capabilities?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Some do, for particular things.  Try writing a mobile app in Fortran.
>> But for much of the real work that drives business (like processing
>> credit card transactions or computing actuary tables languages like
>> COBOL and Fortran are still really the best choice.  The only thing
>> driving the move away from them is academia's decision to drive the bus
>> off a cliff rather than preparing students for entry into the IT world
>> (their actual job!!) by not only not teaching the requisite languages
>> but trying to sway students into believing the languages are dead and
>> totally unused.
>>
>> bill
>>
> 
> While not very good at performance, compiler wasn't written for 
> performance, Basic can do...

The question is not what a specific tool *can* do. You *can* do
more or less anything in any tool, if you want and, in some cases,
push it hard. So what?

> most of that stuff very well, and much more.
> 
> Much the same comparison can be made with your "bus off a cliff" comment, 
> when looking at "the professionals" here and their attitude toward Basic, 
> right?

Nothing wrong with Basic as such. In particular when talkning about
such variants as DEC-Basic with its VMS specific features, or VB.Net
that works just fine for Windows application development. Both works
fine in their specific envionments.

But for some specific tasks, there are better tools both in VMS and
Windows, of course.

It not that tool A is "good" and tool B is "bad". It depends...