Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

F77/C++

Name: Deadpool 2010-05-10 4:12

I read this paper:
http://www.uop.edu.jo/download/PdfCourses/Cplus/cppf77.pdf

And it was published TIME ago, so i was wondering, is there any point in using FORTRAN for the complex math in a program? (for example in a physics engine or a graphics modeller)

Opinions please chaps, and anyone mixed anything else with C++?

Name: Anonymous 2010-05-10 4:29

Seems pointless and overcomplicated. He says right in the intro there are plenty of interfaces for C and F77, so he should have just extern "C"'d some wrappers and called it a day. Representing F77 types as C++ classes is fucking useless and pointless.

And it was published TIME ago, so i was wondering, is there any point in using FORTRAN for the complex math in a program? (for example in a physics engine or a graphics modeller)
I spent a lot of time working on a physics package in F77. The only reason anyone uses it is because existing code they need is already written in F77 (and there is a massive amount of it), and because it took a long fucking time for C compilers to support complex numbers and for C++ compilers to not suck. This is also why this guy spent so much time grafting F77 onto C++, because new physics software like that at the LHC is all C++ now.

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List