Re: FORTRAN vs. Fortran (was: November 5th is Clang-Day)

On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 11:08 PM, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog_at_freebsd.org>wrote:

> On Friday,  2 November 2012 at 12:21:03 +0700, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, 1 Nov 2012 21:59:17 -0700
> > Steve Kargl <sgk_at_troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> BTW, the name of the language is "Fortran".  It's been "Fortran"
> >> for the last 30-something years.
> >
> > I never realised the name change. It seems that I am not alone with
> > this.
>
> Nor I.  Looking at the Wikipedia page, I discover that it had been
> spelt "Fortran" as early as 1956, and there's even a copy of the 1956
> Fortran manual online: http://www.fortran.com/FortranForTheIBM704.pdf
> Interesting reading.
>
> Greg
> --
> Sent from my desktop computer.
> Finger grog_at_FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
> See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
> This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
> problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua
>



Very many years ago , when 2010 was a very distant future , I do not
remember the name of the writer , who wrote approximately :

"In 2010 , there will be Fortran , but a Fortran which may be different ."


Now , perhaps unfortunately , there is no any language better than Fortran
for the Fortran suitable problems .


Thank you very much .


Mehmet Erol Sanliturk