Becoming a Proper Scientific Programmer
Jul. 2nd, 2007 02:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
fivemackThis week, I am mostly learning Fortran 90.
It's a language which nicely matches the sort of code I like to write; arrays as really first-class language elements are good, and the DWIM read() and write() statements avoid some of the more tiresome boilerplate that typed languages attach to I/O.
I assume there are Fortranophones among my readers; is there a nicer way to write
atomcounts(fooi(1),fooi(2),fooi(3)) = &
1+atomcounts(fooi(1),fooi(2),fooi(3))
?
The obvious
atomcounts(fooi) = atomcounts(fooi)+1
translates as
atomcounts(fooi(1)) = 1+atomcounts(fooi(1))
atomcounts(fooi(2)) = 1+atomcounts(fooi(2))
atomcounts(fooi(3)) = 1+atomcounts(fooi(3))
which is a rank error since atomcounts is a 3D array; also, is there an increment-in-place procedure that I'm missing?
It's a language which nicely matches the sort of code I like to write; arrays as really first-class language elements are good, and the DWIM read() and write() statements avoid some of the more tiresome boilerplate that typed languages attach to I/O.
I assume there are Fortranophones among my readers; is there a nicer way to write
atomcounts(fooi(1),fooi(2),fooi(3)) = &
1+atomcounts(fooi(1),fooi(2),fooi(3))
?
The obvious
atomcounts(fooi) = atomcounts(fooi)+1
translates as
atomcounts(fooi(1)) = 1+atomcounts(fooi(1))
atomcounts(fooi(2)) = 1+atomcounts(fooi(2))
atomcounts(fooi(3)) = 1+atomcounts(fooi(3))
which is a rank error since atomcounts is a 3D array; also, is there an increment-in-place procedure that I'm missing?
