> FORTRAN was, and still is, widespread, even if it doesn't look
> anything like itself these days.
On Sun, 19 Mar 2017, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
That's because, unlike the COBOL Professionals, the Fortran people drank
from the OO KoolAid.
Yes, there does exist an Object Oriented
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of Rich Alderson via
cctalk [cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2017 3:07 PM
To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'
Subject: RE: Re: Architectural diversity - was Re: Pair
From: ben
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 6:28 PM
> On 3/16/2017 5:16 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> From: Chuck Guzis
>> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 6:08 PM
>>> And people who weren't there can't understand why FORTRAN was the closest
>>> thing to a "portable" language...
>> Not
From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of ben via cctalk
[cctalk@classiccmp.org]
Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2017 9:28 PM
To: computer talk
Subject: Fwd: Re: Architectural diversity - was Re: Pair of Twiggys
On 3/16/2017 5:16 PM, Bill
