 |
forums.silverfrost.com
Welcome to the Silverfrost forums
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
alex21
Joined: 20 Apr 2011
Posts: 75
Location: Australia
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:51 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Anyway my point is there are plenty of plotting solutions in pretty much any eco-system you look at... All I was originally even arguing for was the continued support of the latest .NET language features, otherwise the VS2015 plugin would suffice. But like I stated these newest language features are no longer supported by VS2015 which is the only version currently supported by the plugin.
I personally don't write much FTN95 code and have just written enough to get it talking to my .NET code base which is one of the features that drew me into this compiler to spite difficulty learning how to use it, so I am simply suggesting that the plugin should be kept up to date with a recent version of VS. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
alex21
Joined: 20 Apr 2011
Posts: 75
Location: Australia
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:54 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
| DanRRight wrote: | | alex21 wrote: | | If your not talented enough to work out how to use something ... |
I did not know that reading documentation needs special talent. May be i am especially dumb, as with rare exclusion i never read any documentation, including the text books in my speciality. I immediate start with the tasks & exercise section after the paragraphs. |
Look man it does play off as dumb/arrogant when you obviously spent all of 5 minutes looking at the documentation before calling it rubish, its a good product people made for free and has personally generated a great deal of value for me in turn...
If I had a product that needed plots anything like the ones you pictured I would make it, maybe using OxyPlot, maybe using something else, I am not too attached to a single plotting library and don't mind mixing and matching. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2852
Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 14, 2018 4:37 pm Post subject: Re: |
|
|
| alex21 wrote: | | its a good product people made for free and has personally generated a great deal of value for me in turn... |
How damn hard to explain things sometimes. Did you understand me (and Eddie-LitusS gave more examples) that life teaches that over long time the sign of "generated great deal value" with niche third-party products is very often negative? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2852
Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 21, 2018 2:04 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
| alex21 wrote: | | The most valuable feature of this compiler is its .NET inter-operability to me for this reason not the crutches it provides to continue developing in language that fewer people alive use everyday. |
 crutches? fewer people? That fewer people will make almost all other compilers to run and run around the globe for their money.
Here is weekly downloads and total downloads statistics from the CNET and DOWNLOAD dot COM for number C / C++ / C# compilers of different companies versus listed there Fortran compilers including ...take a chair...FTN77 and FTN95 as old as circa a decade ago!
| Code: | Last week Total
CCS C Compiler -105 27,181
Microsoft Visual C++ (x86) - 67 230,207
Personal C Sharp - 44 20,766
C compiler - 28 1,275
Intel C++ Compiler Professional - 14 50,412
Pelles C - 5 17,095
Small Device C Compiler (Linux) - 3 160
C with Reference for iPhone - 3 1,952
Mobile C for iPhone - 2 274
Small Device C compiler - 1 6,209
Axiomatic Multi-Platform C - 1 7,647
Small Device C Compiler, Debian - 1 46
C for iOS - 0
Mobile C ( C/C++ Compiler ) for Android - 0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
last week Total
Silverfrost FTN95 (2012) - 48 322,113
Silverfrost FTN77 (2006) - 43 90,382
Intel Visual Fortran Compiler Professional 2009 - 28 36,373
Intel Fortran Compiler Professional for Mac - 0 1,985
Pro Fortran Compiler Suite for Mac - 0 3,336
Simply Fortran for macOS - 0 116
|
BTW, few years back FTN95 was the most popular on CNET (they were doing this statistics) in the entire section of COMPILERS and tool (all C, C#, VB, VBnet, Pascals and long bunch of others. I wrote here about this several years back). Silverfrost has to consider to place newer version there |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
silverfrost
Site Admin
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 191
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Sat Aug 11, 2018 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I have uploaded the latest version of FTN95 to download.com/cnet. It isn't showing yet but presumably it will. We used to use download.com as a way of distributing the personal edition. It cost $100 a year or so and they did the hosting. However, all they were really interested in was advertising and getting us to advertise on cnet. At some point they decided they would take our installer and wrap it in another that also offered other products like virus scanners and disk cleaners. We stopped using them immediately! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DanRRight
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 2852
Location: South Pole, Antarctica
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2018 11:30 am Post subject: Re: |
|
|
| John-Silver wrote: | | ... meanwhile, Alex and Klaus (top 2 comments of this thread) are still probably awaiting a simple reply to their original enquiry which seems to have got lost the last 3 months or so (amongst the lively debate about .NET and it's usefulness or otherwise) |
Wasn't it clear why no respond, John? If my vague wordswordswords and plots were not clear let's try to express the same but different way -- using language of numbers. There are around 1/1000 of all programmers who use Fortran. Out of those small fraction there are 1/1000 who are interested in NET = total 1 per million
And out of those left the 1/1000 are interested in using O-hu-plot graphics. Total = one per billion.
Meantime almost 1 out of 1 people who use programming are interested in the embedded in each and every programming language high quality, easy and intuitive graphics. Matlab demonstrated how Fortran77-like language (!!!) can overcome all other languages combined with the number of purchases among scientific and engineering masses just by integrating professional graphics callable in one click
Silverfrost would be crazy to serve 1 per billion versus - if not everyone then - at least 1 per 1000 (unless it costs them nothing in efforts and time)
Last edited by DanRRight on Thu Aug 16, 2018 10:52 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LitusSaxonicum
Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 2393
Location: Yateley, Hants, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 16, 2018 12:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
My take on anything is that if a product is advertised as doing X or supporting Y, it should work and should be kept up to date. Hence my opinion is that when SF have the opportunity, they should interface to the latest Visual Studio. I speak as one who has no interest in Visul Studio, .NET, nor things of that ilk. However, it is observable that SF have a lot of things on their plate at the moment, for example, a rash of bug fixes for 64-bit FTN95, a smaller rash of bugs in obscure areas of 32-bit FTN95, enhancements to Clearwin+ ... especially 'native' %pl. Hence one can only expect VS 2017 compatibility in the fullness of time. VS is itself a moving target, which makes things more complicated.
VS itself was going to allow us to have code that worked on all operating systems. It never delivered. Not only that, but the different versions don't seem to offer backwards or forwards compatibility, and are even picky about which version of Windows they run on.
Eddie |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 450
Location: Manchester
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 26, 2018 6:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I am usually the site admin. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
