On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 13:54:03 -0500, George Neuner wrote:
> On 31 Jan 2008 22:54:05 GMT, Andrew Reilly
> <andrew-newspost@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:05:02 -0800, Marshall wrote:
>>
>>> I wonder what the percentage is for Forth programmers?
>>
>>Fortran and COBOL programmers (old-school, anyway), might bias the
>>result very slightly. There probably aren't any so exclusively focused
>>any more, though...
>
> COBOL would certainly skew the results, but I'm not so sure about
> Fortran. Many old Fortran programs implement manual recursion with
> arrays. I wouldn't hazard a guess at the percentage but I suspect more
> Fortran programmers were more knowledgable than most people today
> suspect.
Yes, you're right. Maths/physics outlook, etc. Many of the good matrix
algorithms are intrinsically recursive, etc. It was just the absense of
recursion support in the language (and the corresponding absence of an
argument stack in some implementations) that I was thinking of. So make
that "very" bold-italic in the case of Fortran...
Cheers,
--
Andrew
|
