[Papyrus-L] Pap vs. others and where's Dave?

[Denis Brown]

Dear Dave and list members,

Meet another "dinosaur!"  I agree with a couple of others that Fortran is
still an active language in some circles and there are still
implementations for various operating systems including Windows and
Linux.  The big problem with Fortran seems to me its lack of a graphical
user interface -- correct me if I'm wrong here but even Digital's Fortan
for Windows offers a very rudimentary gui.  Not sure about the Linux
version but I suspect it's the same.  Fortran gained its fame, as its name
derives, from Formula Translation.  That's what it's good at, calculating.

Dave, you're probably sick of hearing "helpful suggestions" but since I've
enterred the fray, your core Fortran code should be couple-able with some
form of graphical interface.  My hunch, and apologies if I'm severely off
track here, is that there has developed a very tight integration between
the IO and the computational aspects and this would be very natural in
Fortran -- says one who's "been there and done that."  The move away from
that model to a modular approach is a fair step but it must have been
possible for you to even contemplate the development of the MAC code.

What I'm leading towards is that "code is code" and translation to another
language while a challenge could be the best move.  By all means retain
that which works well in Fortran, just give the rest some breathing space
for being implemented in some other (language.)  Developing the code
inthis way could very well be a "win-win" situation.  You've heard
eloquent commentary and testimony to the worth of what you've put together
over the years.  Perhaps this "cloud" that RSD has been under will yield a
silver lining, a Papyrus that is flexible in implementation yet retains
its power.  I, for one, sincerely hope so.

At least one list member has argued for the retention of the DOS-based
model we currently have.  That too is a good thought but, operating system
merits aside, the future of DOS, or even the DOS-box, looks bleak.  More
knowlegable members correct me but I'm under the impression that DOS
functionality in Windows 2000 is limited and in Windows Me is non
existant?  Not sure about Windows XP.  My case?  I'll keep a couple of
machines at Win9x level for Papyrus' use.

Final suggestion -- if this airing of technical linen is inappropriate for
a general discussion list, Dave, how about starting a fresh list --
Papyrus-T for Technical discussion.  After all the DOS version is still
alive and living on at least several machines under my care :-)

Sorry if I've rubbed salt into a wound.
Denis