[fitsbits] top or bottom

[Stephen Walton]

On 4 May 2000, Clive Page wrote:

> In article <Pine.HPX.4.03.10005030917520.17814-100000 at galileo.csun.edu>,
> Stephen Walton  <swalton at galileo.csun.edu> wrote:
>
> >I've believed for a long time that Fortran-90 is superior to C for most
> >scientific work.
> 
> I agree with you, and the facts speak for themselves.  The only current
> dispute is whether C++ or Fortran95 is better for scientific work.

My impression (I admit mainly from articles in Computers in Physics
magazine) is that C++ has only become really usable in the last two years
or so, when template technology and highly optimizing compilers like KAI
C++ brought the performance of workaday tasks like complex arrays up to
the Fortran level.

I don't know why Microsoft dropped Fortran Powerstation, but I would guess
the shrinking market for Fortran was part of it.

> To drag this back to FITS: one of the advantages of using Fortran90 to
> call FITSIO is that you can set up a module containing interface
> definitions of all the FITSIO routines you ever use...

Can you put these up on the Web somewhere and/or contribute them to Bill
Pence?  It would be even better to have a Fortran-90-style interface to
FITSIO which would take advantage of things like optional arguments and
the SIZE intrinsic.  I think I remember reading in a NAG press release
that the average number of (required) arguments for NAG Fortran library
routines was 9 for the Fortran-77 version and 2 for the Fortran-90
version.

--
Stephen Walton, Professor of Physics and Astronomy,
California State University, Northridge
stephen.walton at csun.edu