- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
A person at my company needs to upgrade his Fortran compiler for Windows from a very old copy of Microsoft FORTRAN PowerStation 1.0a. If he wants to eventually use the merged Intel Visual Fortran due out later this year, then which is the better buy right now in terms of cost and simplicity: the current IFC or CVF?
We're under tight cost constraints now, so he wants to get the compiler that is the best value. What may be more important, though, is that he doesn't want to learn one IDE now and a completely new IDE and way of doing things once IVF becomes available.
This guy is not the type who will download demo copies of both compilers and try them himself. He's not very good at using the IDE and is counting on me to tutor him on how to, for example, use the debugger, which is what prompted this question in the first place (MPS 1.0a froze every time I tried to show him how to set a breakpoint and then start his program.). I bought the cheap upgrade to IFC for CVF users, but I've used only CVF. I'm waiting for IVF to appear before making the switch.
What say ye?
Mike
We're under tight cost constraints now, so he wants to get the compiler that is the best value. What may be more important, though, is that he doesn't want to learn one IDE now and a completely new IDE and way of doing things once IVF becomes available.
This guy is not the type who will download demo copies of both compilers and try them himself. He's not very good at using the IDE and is counting on me to tutor him on how to, for example, use the debugger, which is what prompted this question in the first place (MPS 1.0a froze every time I tried to show him how to set a breakpoint and then start his program.). I bought the cheap upgrade to IFC for CVF users, but I've used only CVF. I'm waiting for IVF to appear before making the switch.
What say ye?
Mike
Link Copied
- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »
25 Replies
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Hmmm. It appears that Gerry is a fan of .NET, and is quite annoyed that Intel have no plans to produce FORTRAN MSIL. Fair enough. However, having a go because Intel isn't doing what Gerry wants is out of line. Steve made it abundantly clear that should enough customers request it, FORTRAN MSIL etc. would be in the pipeline. He also made it clear that this hasn't happened.
From my point of view, I'd have to say that I'd side with the Intel. Despite much touting, I think .NET still has to prove itself. Yes, you can do some neat things with it, yes it makes somethings easier, but when you run into significant problems with it on the very first thing you try and you find that its famed 'management' is not quite as clever as it claims to be...well I can understand Intel's reluctance.
As far as I'm concerned MS has no defence for disallowing mixed language projects in .NET, or for making third party compiler integration more difficult. If you can do it in separate projects, you can do it in a single project. MS is making us jump hoops for the sake of it.
OK, I'm an engineer doing programming, so don't really care about MSIL, or what environment or language I use, I have no particular beef with MS - I make my living with their products, but like most users (surely!) I just want a tool that works and is easy to use.
.NET may be the future, that doesn't mean it's a better future.
Dan
From my point of view, I'd have to say that I'd side with the Intel. Despite much touting, I think .NET still has to prove itself. Yes, you can do some neat things with it, yes it makes somethings easier, but when you run into significant problems with it on the very first thing you try and you find that its famed 'management' is not quite as clever as it claims to be...well I can understand Intel's reluctance.
As far as I'm concerned MS has no defence for disallowing mixed language projects in .NET, or for making third party compiler integration more difficult. If you can do it in separate projects, you can do it in a single project. MS is making us jump hoops for the sake of it.
OK, I'm an engineer doing programming, so don't really care about MSIL, or what environment or language I use, I have no particular beef with MS - I make my living with their products, but like most users (surely!) I just want a tool that works and is easy to use.
.NET may be the future, that doesn't mean it's a better future.
Dan
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
If you look here
http://developer.intel.com/technology/itj/2003/volume07issue01/index.htm
and
http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/technologies/mrte/index.htm
you may conclude that that Intel doesn't share your pessimism on .NET. Your take on its presumed demise is reminiscent of those who in the past swore that commodity 64-bit addressable processors would never see the light of day and that Alpha's would reign forever. Change happens.
BTW, I personally dislike .NET but I'm getting the best out of it. Of course, YMMV.
Read for yourself the great aeronautical engineer Theodor Von Karman's response to the 'OK, I'm an engineer...' line in
W R Sears, ?Von Karman : fluid dynamics and other things,? Physics Today 39 (1986), 34-39.
Ciao,
Gerry T.
http://developer.intel.com/technology/itj/2003/volume07issue01/index.htm
and
http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/technologies/mrte/index.htm
you may conclude that that Intel doesn't share your pessimism on .NET. Your take on its presumed demise is reminiscent of those who in the past swore that commodity 64-bit addressable processors would never see the light of day and that Alpha's would reign forever. Change happens.
BTW, I personally dislike .NET but I'm getting the best out of it. Of course, YMMV.
Read for yourself the great aeronautical engineer Theodor Von Karman's response to the 'OK, I'm an engineer...' line in
W R Sears, ?Von Karman : fluid dynamics and other things,? Physics Today 39 (1986), 34-39.
Ciao,
Gerry T.
Message Edited by intel.software.network.support on 12-09-2005 01:49 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Gerry,
I don't think .NET is heading for any kind of 'demise', its here and its here to stay (just try finding any 'new' help from MS on older technologies!). The fact is, I'll be writing and maintaining C++/FORTRAN for the forseeable future, so hopefully by the time I get to .NET if will be up a few versions so I can avoid the difficulties my colleagues are having with it.
(Judging by the swearing, blaspheming and general incredulity at official MS 'workarounds' (bodging), that regularly emanates from our .NET guys, it still has some issues).
I couldn't get the Von Karman thing...can't get to the PHysics Today site for some reason. :(
I don't think .NET is heading for any kind of 'demise', its here and its here to stay (just try finding any 'new' help from MS on older technologies!). The fact is, I'll be writing and maintaining C++/FORTRAN for the forseeable future, so hopefully by the time I get to .NET if will be up a few versions so I can avoid the difficulties my colleagues are having with it.
(Judging by the swearing, blaspheming and general incredulity at official MS 'workarounds' (bodging), that regularly emanates from our .NET guys, it still has some issues).
I couldn't get the Von Karman thing...can't get to the PHysics Today site for some reason. :(
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Dan,
Sorry if I misunderstood, I somehow thought you were using .NET. Your colleagues are quite right about it, especially .NET 2002; 2003 is a lot better, especially VC++ with it being more standard compliant, having the STL, managed/unmanaged code, Windows Forms, etc.
'bodging', what a neat word, is it dialect or what's its origin? Destined for OED I bet.
Physics Today is often only kept for several years by most libraries, even AIP's online, but I'm sure you can get it from one of the Royal Charter libs. I read it when it circulated and noted the reference but I don't currently have it.
Ciao,
Gerry T.
Sorry if I misunderstood, I somehow thought you were using .NET. Your colleagues are quite right about it, especially .NET 2002; 2003 is a lot better, especially VC++ with it being more standard compliant, having the STL, managed/unmanaged code, Windows Forms, etc.
'bodging', what a neat word, is it dialect or what's its origin? Destined for OED I bet.
Physics Today is often only kept for several years by most libraries, even AIP's online, but I'm sure you can get it from one of the Royal Charter libs. I read it when it circulated and noted the reference but I don't currently have it.
Ciao,
Gerry T.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
Gerry,
Probably me misleading you - I've dabbled with .NET in a kind of 'should we upgrade now' fashion (not yet being the outcome), but other colleagues having to write web-services etc. have already upgraded. They are still on 2002 I think - but do show us neat stuff like writing a web service in 5 mins, extensible GUIs via assembly DLLs etc., and complain about it not releasing references, and its obscure and basic documentation (along the lines of 'AnyOldFunction - this functions performs AnyOldFunction' d'oh!).
Bodging? I don't think its dialect, quite common in the UK, perhaps more so in northern England. To do a 'bodge job' or 'to bodge' - pretty much akin to US kludge/kludging. God knows what its origin is! probably from botch
see http://cgi.peak.org/~jeremy/retort.cgi?British=bodge
Dan
Probably me misleading you - I've dabbled with .NET in a kind of 'should we upgrade now' fashion (not yet being the outcome), but other colleagues having to write web-services etc. have already upgraded. They are still on 2002 I think - but do show us neat stuff like writing a web service in 5 mins, extensible GUIs via assembly DLLs etc., and complain about it not releasing references, and its obscure and basic documentation (along the lines of 'AnyOldFunction - this functions performs AnyOldFunction' d'oh!).
Bodging? I don't think its dialect, quite common in the UK, perhaps more so in northern England. To do a 'bodge job' or 'to bodge' - pretty much akin to US kludge/kludging. God knows what its origin is! probably from botch
see http://cgi.peak.org/~jeremy/retort.cgi?British=bodge
Dan
Reply
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- « Previous
-
- 1
- 2
- Next »