News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Fortran by smarx007 on Monday August 28, 2023 @06:25AM (#37292018)
I fail to see how risk #6 was rated "very likely" given that neither #4 nor #5 scored "very likely".
Re:Fortran by jraph on Monday August 28, 2023 @06:41AM (#37292143)
I can see this.

About 4: I think Fortran looks quite like C when it comes to the CPU architecture. Both are somewhat low level procedural languages.

As long as C works well on future CPUs, Fortran is probably fine and I don't see C disappear overnight. At least, Fortran compilers can be updated to produce reasonable code for new CPUs. Which should happen because of the shared compiler architecture (backend).

About 5: GPUs architectures seem less stable and seem to require specific development. If those specific developments require language support, that's probably not coming to Fortran if the assumption is that Fortran is going maintenance-only.

About 6: advances in computing technology are not restricted to CPUs and GPUs.

Re:Fortran by reikonomusha on Monday August 28, 2023 @06:33AM (#37292079)
It's described more in the report. Their assessment #6 hinges on

- "very likely" poor or non-existent robust GPU support,

- unlikely resist support for specialized processors (i.e., non-general purpose CPU) like "Data Flow processors" and "processing in/near memory", and

- Fortran advocacy and advancement is likely limited to DOE, which the report implies is insufficient.

- Vendors of hardware have prioritized C++.

Re:Fortran by stellalo on Monday August 28, 2023 @06:38AM (#37292113)
I guess “advances in technology” are not only new CPUs and GPUs, but also many other kinds of hardware and software
Re:Fortran by pxeger1 on Monday August 28, 2023 @06:29AM (#37292060)
"computing advances" probably means new software and algorithmic techniques, not (only) new hardware.