Hey, Fortran isn't dead!

It's just that the bulk of its user community is engineers and physical scientists, so the CS world thinks it's dead. Check out the codes in CFD, numerical relativity, global climate models, etc.

Now, CLISTS and JCL are languages that deserve to be killed, buried, disinterred, chopped into very small pieces, put through a blender, incinerated, and reinterred in Yucca Mountain. Maybe along with APL.

And FORTRAN will never die, for that reason. It is too easy for the scientists and engineers to write their own data reduction software in it. Most other languages are "richer", which means "have a bunch of features that must be learned even though they don't apply to MY problem."

It is too easy for the scientists and engineers to write their own data reduction software in it.

Are you implying that scientists and engineers shouldn't write their own code (and CFD, numerical relativity, etc are most emphatically not data reduction software; they're models)?

If so, I suggest that CS majors start getting better backgrounds in physics, mathematics, fluid mechanics, and chemistry. Very many of them do not have the basic tools needed to write or maintain these kinds of code, and if a CS graduate can't manage ODE, let alone PDE, they can't even have a sensible conversation about Navier-Stokes, NRQM, or QCD (not that I can have a sensible conversation about the latter two.)

By the way, it's not FORTRAN; it's Fortran. It has been for about 20 years, since X3J3 finished the F90 standard

emc

e^(π√−1) = −1

Pascal isn't dead, Delphi is the GUI version of Pascal, and it's used quite a bit, especially with HTML editors and such. It's as easy as VB, but not as shitty.