This is a language without imagination or elegance. It's

>>56072771
What have you code with Fortran
What is your compiler

>>56073014
Quantum chemistry shit.

Gfortran.

>>56073155
I think you are just adding Fortran on your list of excuses to drink eg "My wife's son won his basketball game, better celebrate with a mickey's big mouth"

>>56073175
desu I don't drink and program, but fortran is making me consider it.

>>56073396
so you work in the applied sciences?
Where are you based?

>>56073488
North America

>fortran
>not just using matlab or scipy

>>56073534
>are you a big fat person?

>>56073545
>a bunch of libraries for niche scientific calculations were written in fortran
>nobody can be bothered to port over the barely readable code that was written back in the 70/80's
>scientists that rely on those libraries are stuck with fortran

>>56073545
>>56074173
You are now aware that scipy is mostly written in fortran.

Modern Fortran (i.e. '03+) is pretty nice. If you're not a retard it's also fast and readable. It's main problem is the amount of shit legacy code.

>>56072771
I've been learning Fortran 77 for a while now and enjoy programming in it high, drunk, or sober, although learning it is really only bearable when I'm not sober once I'm just sitting down and programming I can do it sober

>>56073545
Kek, enjoy your dog shit slow FORTRAN wrappers.

This is why I come to /g/
99% of people and posts are shit. But every once in a while someone pops in and suggest something that I haven't ried before. So I do and sometimes I like it, but the fact of having some external input is what makes me consider stuff I wouldn't even think of otherwise.
BSD, APL, Haskell, Emacs, Gentoo, are some of those things I've tried thanks to these few people.
>inb4 all the 12 year old and loser neckbeard start calling me names just because they feel like it

I think the main problem I have with Fortran is having to declare variables at the top of functions instead of where they're used. Unnecessary scrolling.

>>56076258
Here's another one for your list: Coq (with CoqIDE). There's a book called Software Foundations for when you're lost.

>>56076258
>APL

Why do you enjoy torturing yourself

>>56074214
But if all that shit legacy code was clean, employers wouldn't pay as much for people that are willing/able to use it.

>>56076860
Your functions are too long friend :^)

>>56077865
True.
>>56078142
;^)

>>56077670
If you're gonna use Coq, you might as well use it together with Emacs and ProofGeneral.

>>56078860
That takes nonzero effort to install though. Especially so with Windows.

>>56078892
> nonzero effort
Well let's not even bother then.

>>56072771

The only valid reason to use Fortran is the legacy code of your old professor..

>>56080350
or you're doing anything related to math, science and HPC in general

Beauty is where you find it.

I've seen beautiful brainfuck, elegant VB, horrible Rust, and illegible python.

>>56080483
>illegible python
>illegible
Redundant

>>56080498
You've never had to dig into a giant existing system written in Haskell, have you? Python is incredibly legible compared to most of the production systems I work with.

>>56072771
Is it good for first language ?

>>56080436

Why not Matlab, Python, C or even Java?

I've done a STEM field and never seen Fortran apart from legacy code..


But hey, I think it's cool to do a non-mainstream langauge. Keep it up, mate!

>>56080928
It's ok. You can get all the basics of loops and flow control and functions etc. It's very readable as well with no strange syntax. If you want to go into science/numerical programming it'll be worth it

>>56080928
its special purpose is to be easy to use for math and science nerds. NASA still uses it (mainly due to the sheer arrogance of science nerds)

>>56080988
Don't know anything about matlab or java, but python is slow (except libraries written in fortran/c). It has good intrinsic for arrays (unlike C) and you don't have to deal with pointers and memory management.

In other words of you need to do fast shit with arrays Fortran is good.

>>56080988
because they're either slow as shit or otherwise going to be inefficient/less maintainable in some way when it comes to the kinds of big dataset problems you're typically working with in supercomputing and the like, you'll definitely see those kinds of solutions used for smaller problems though, nothing wrong with it

>>56081119
Thinking about it you do have to allocate/deallocate large arrays (just like malloc/free). You still don't have to worry about pointers for passing arrays around etc. though.

>>56081119

But Java is not even so much slower than C anymore..

I don't know how long your calculations are, but I would rather wait one hour longer and have a good codebase.

>>56081333
Does java still stop at random times to clean up its shit?

>>56081333
>good codebase
There's no reason you couldn't have a good codebase in Fortran. They've even added some OO capabilities if that's your thing, though I've not looked into it.

>>56081333
Unless you count startup time, or your test case causes java to GC during the test. When you do, C is incredibly faster.

>>56081045
>>56081011
Oh cool, I'll try it out during the week :)

File: fortranValgol.png (113KB, 884x561px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 884x561px

>>56072771

>>56072771
People who dont like Fortran usually have never programmed in Fortran and just assume that its an overly complicated mathematics language. Fortran has very simple, commonly used structures like loops and if statements like any other language, its syntax is very similar to Pascal, especially in the way that variables have to be declared in their own section. The reason its used so much in scientific programming is because it is the fastest language it the world. It is very safe, you dont have weird pointer errors or implicit casting, or memory allocation leaks like you do with C/C++. Its the perfect language for number crunching on supercomputers where you need the absolute fastest speed possible.