| ▲ | cat-turner 5 hours ago |
| out of curiosity, why fortran? no disrespect. I wrote a lot of scientific software in the earlier days of my career and I learned fortran to update ocean modeling software. |
|
| ▲ | FormerLabFred 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| You are not the first one to ask :) We built Cobolsky. Will go public soon.
Parallelly too curious on Fortran. The world is better with a Fortran-based social network client in it :) When we are building the feed composer, in next version, Fortran will be great for the algorithm etc. Keeping the ancient languages alive. I built some Cobol stuff many years ago. Back at it again. Rusty. Both Cobolsky and Fortransky looks great on Swordfish90’s cool-retro-term, but we are building our own terminal for Fortransky too. There is a blog post with screenshots over at Patreon/formerlab Can’t get enough Fortran |
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > The world is better with a Fortran-based social network client in it If you don't mind me asking, why is the world better with more Fortran-based software? | | |
| ▲ | FormerLabFred 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Our modern languages are built on it, and it’s incredibly fast, so it deserves to be kept alive. We owe a great deal to the people who wrote it in the 1950s I guess | | |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > Our modern languages are built on it It's part of the lineage, yeah, probably started with Algol though? Fast I guess is always nice, but I'm not sure that's enough to keep it alive solely for that, at least to me. | |
| ▲ | hedora an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I came here to suggest COBOL as a better fit, then saw your comment a few levels up in this thread. Out of curiosity, does your implementation use CODASYL? (For people that don't pay much attention to historical software systems, most CODASYL implementations were similar to JSON document databases, so going that way isn't as crazy as it sounds.) | |
| ▲ | mountainriver 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This thread makes me happy |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | enriquto 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > why fortran? why not? the language is straightforward and loops are fast. It is portable and your code will work unchanged for the next 50 years. It may be a bit verbose, but that's not a big deal with today's tooling. |
| |
| ▲ | FormerLabFred 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Fortran will survive the cockroaches even, when the world 404s | |
| ▲ | pklausler 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Your code will work unchanged until you try to change compilers or your compiler adopts a J3 breaking change to the language. | | |
| ▲ | kergonath 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > your compiler adopts a J3 breaking change to the language Like all the 3 of them they added in the last 30 years, and that compiler vendors are not enforcing anyway because they don’t want to annoy their users? Windows’ backward compatibility is a joke compared to Fortran. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | pklausler 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| maybe they weren't really concerned about portability or a decent standard? |
| |
| ▲ | FormerLabFred 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | It’s keyboard navigation only, and we got the Bluesky firehose raw straight into the Rust decoder. Or we switch mode to Jetstream with m+EnTER
:) You hit l+ENTER to like a post. If anyone replies from Bluesky, we hit n+ENTER and see the notifs.
And so on Fortransky is 70% Fortran, rest is Rust, C and a tiny Python helper |
|
