At 12:08 AM 2/27/2004, Drew McCormack wrote:

>  the general thread being
>that most languages are imperfect, and fortran is not any less perfect
>than existing languages. I think I can agree with this.
>
>
>
>But consider this: C++ is being replaced in its application domain by
>other languages, like java and C#. C++ will eventually die. Many of the
>mistakes made in C++ have been improved upon in newer languages, and
>eventually everyone will have made the transition to the new-improved
>model.

C++ may eventually fade in arenas where java or C# are adequate.  I don't
see how you can characterize those arenas as having belonged to C++.  But
I'm way outside my competence, or the interest of this list.

I've been nearly caught up in acrimonious debates with people who consider
it obvious that only Microsoft managed languages should survive.  By all
accounts, a few Fortran vendors are doing a good job in that world, maybe
with a few missing f90 capabilities.  If you consider that Fortran has been
dying a long slow death since the advent of Algol 60, with each event along
the way being a symptom, be my guest.  Even Microsoft has bragged from the
beginning of MSIL that Fortran was among the languages committed to be
supported.  I don't see that as evidence that Fortran will continue to
"die" or even that JITted implementations will replace compiled ones. More
as evidence that Fortran has done the best job of adapting to new
requirements while continuing to support existing ones.

Tim Prince