Languages for Numerical Computation --- Was C vs FORTRAN 
Author Message
 Languages for Numerical Computation --- Was C vs FORTRAN

Colston Chandler has hit the nail on the head.  Computer Scientists
use computers to do computer science; other scientists and engineers
use computers to do something else --- like physics, O.R., chemistry,
ocean modelling.  The difference is that while Computer Scientists can
appreciate systems for their own elegance, the rest of us must master
both the computer and another discipline to get some net output.

A good computer language should do more than substitute for binary
machine code at a higher level; it should help you think about the
problem at hand.  It should "extend the vocabulary" with which you can
address your technical subject.  Computer languages, like every day
languages, have different strengths and weaknesses.  Ideas which are
easy to express in some are difficult to express in some languages are
very difficult to express in others.  

This is precisely why enforced standardization on a single language
(an occasional bureaucratic result of language wars) is so harmful; it
restricts the vocabulary we can use to understand problems.  Where I
work, the answer is "C" --- we just have not yet found all the
questions.  Now I have no objection to C; I write a lot of good code
in it, but it's the Holy Grail.  For some problems, C is a natural
language --- especially those in which the data comes in "bytes".
But for other problems --- especially those which are array- or
list-oriented, it's often not the best language in which to think
about the problem.  For these problems, I may use APL, Scheme, or
Lotus-1,2,3, depending on what I need to do.  This upsets my local
software support people because it's "not standard."   My response is
that I'd rather have a working algorithm in a non-standard language
than a non-working algorithm written in C.  I can always translate a
working algorithm later.

What then marks a "good" language?  I think it is the balance between
conceptual power and syntactic simplicity.  APL and Scheme may be two
polar cases.  APL is a language of extreme conceptual power, but
convoluted syntax.  It's my language of preference for problems
involving numerical array computations because of the powerful and
concise array operators it offers.  I could write the same operations
in Scheme or C, but they are part of the basic vocabulary in APL.
Scheme, on the other had, is a language of elegant syntax and
conceptual simplicity.  Scheme is my language of choice for problems
in which I can pose the problem as a set of simple recursive
operations on a stream of data.  Scheme is a natural language for
logical recursion, just as APL is a natural language for arrays.  

In summary, the "best" language --- in my experience --- varies with
the specifics of each problem.  There is no one "best" solution.



Tue, 01 Jun 1993 22:30:11 GMT  
 
 [ 1 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Fortran vs C for numerical computation

2. Announcing Octave - a high-level language for numerical computations

3. Fortran vs C for computations

4. Fortran vs. C for numerical work

5. Fortran vs. C for numerical work

6. Fortran vs. C for numerical work

7. Different Numerical answers: VMS vs. Unix Fortran

8. C vs Fortran for numerical work

9. Fortran vs. C for numerical work

10. C vs Fortran for numerical work

11. Fortran vs. C for numerical work

12. Re : Fortran vs. C for numerical work

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software