Thanks to all those who sent me a pointer to this infamous paper, not
to mention those who sent me the paper itself.
This paper, which mostly contains a bunch of obvious principles
known for years, does not deserve any specific rebuttal.
The paper says more about the reviewing process (if any) of this
journal, than about good or bad programming principles.
It came to my mind that it is not the first time, and probably not
the last time either, that we see this kind of biased and unfounded
statements about Fortran. Should me write a series of ¨standard
rebuttals¨ to the usual statements we see about Fortran, and the
next time a supid paper apppears in JCSI (Journal of Computer
Science Insanity), we would just send the URL, and mention that
¨2,4,5 an 12 apply to the paper you just published, with the
title : Why Fortran is so xxxx¨?
Soections could be something like :
1. Fortran still exists today
2. Fortran programmers are happy with it, thank you
3. Fortran is no longer Fortran 66
4. Derived types exist in Fortran
etc.
Bertrand Meltz
Commissariat a l´Energie Atomique | e-mail : [log in to unmask]
CEA / DIF , BP 12 | Tel : (33) [0] 1 69 26 57 83
91680 Bruyeres-le-Chatel , FRANCE | Fax : (33) [0] 1 69 26 70 93
|