NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.
To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.
NOTICE: This version of the NSF Unidata web site (archive.unidata.ucar.edu) is no longer being updated.
Current content can be found at unidata.ucar.edu.
To learn about what's going on, see About the Archive Site.
On 11/06/2014 02:06 PM, Chris Barker wrote:
On Thu, Nov 6, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Nick Papior Andersen <nickpapior@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:nickpapior@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: I think both are key! (you can similarly call fortran from C...) You can, but the ABIs are not standardised, and Fortran compilers are harder to come by. i.e. I know of no system with a Fortran compiler and no C compiler, but plenty with C and not Fortran. Not that you should do only one, but if you have to choose, C is the lower common denominator. -Chris
Fortran is not charming or sexy these days. However, given that a very large base of scientific programs is written and will continue to be written in Fortran (77,90,95,2XYZ), particularly in the oceans/atmosphere/climate universe, keeping up-to-date, efficient, and user-friendly support for Fortran bindings sounds as a wise decision to me.Moreover, pedestrian users (undergrad and grad students, postdocs, scientists, professors, and other aficionados) often write
simple Fortran programs that rely on NetCDF, which although may not be shining, are useful and relevant for their research. Other languages don't get even close to the Fortran user- and code-base (using NetCDF). Nevertheless, after about NetcCDF version 4.1.3, the three main bindings (C, Fortran, C++) were separated, and no longer distributed from a single tarball. They don't seem to have the same building framework with Gnu Autotools either. There is some stuff on Git, but not nearly as easy to handle as it used to be. The release numbers are now different (inconsistent?) across these three bindings also. Using CMake perhaps, instead of Gnu AutoTools also? Maybe there is a rationale for that, but I don't quite understand why. Anyway, this made it harder to build, keep, and use a consistent and up-to-date group of bindings in Linux machines, and also made it harder to cater for Fortran users/programmers. Even Linux distribution packages lagged behind. That is something that I think Unidata and the NetCDF group could/should look into with more interest, and hopefully return to the good old days of a single and comprehensive tarball with C, Fortran, and C++ bindings, plus an easy to use "configure;make;make install" setup. This may not cover Windows and Macs, but will be help a lot the Linux users. My two cents of biased opinion. Thank you, Gus Correa Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University In this regard, I wish
-- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception Chris.Barker@xxxxxxxx <mailto:Chris.Barker@xxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ netcdfgroup mailing list netcdfgroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For list information or to unsubscribe, visit: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/mailing_lists/
netcdfgroup archives: