🚀 go-pugleaf

> Richard Pitre wrote:
> >Why leave out complex numbers and complex
> >transcendental functions?
> 
> Because Oberon is a systems programming language, not a number-crunching
> language.

Oberon may have been originally used as a systems programming language (as
was C) but Oberon-2 (its successor) has proved its worth in non-system
related activities such mathematical formating tools, hardware design tool
generation (CAD), editors, expression evaluation tools, document preparation
systems, etc.
 
> If you wanna crunch complex numbers with complex transcendental functions,
> and you don't want to code it yourself, you need to be coding in FORTRAN. 
> This is what FORTRAN was designed to do.

Ugh... if you need access to large libraries of scientific subroutines you
need to code in Fortran -- but I wouldn't advise it for any new work.

> Use the right tool for the right job.

If the definition of the "right tool" means it makes you more productive,
then Oberon-2 would be the right tool for me.  I wouldn't want to chase
elusive errors caused by integers masquarading as reals and being forced
to guess at what the real interfaces to subroutines happen to be.

As an engineer, I have used Oberon-2 to solve engineering problems in 
much less time than it would have taken in Fortran.


Regards,
	Michael

--------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Griebling, P.Eng.		grieblm@trt.allied.com
AlliedSignal Aerospace Canada		my opinions are my own