Over 65 years ago this month, researchers ran the first FORTRAN program
Over 65 years ago this month, researchers ran the first FORTRAN program
This is considered as the beginning of general-purpose programming. ( Image credits : NASA and MIT_CSAIL )
But job listing will still be asking for 70 years of FORTRAN experience.
72 0 ReplyCan you really be proficient in a language you didn't invent?
14 0 Reply
Titles like these make me chortle. Over 65 years ago this month means it could be 70, 80, 100 etc.
33 0 ReplyThe funniest part to me is how 'this month' is absolutely meaningless. It was over 65 years ago last month too, and the month before that
16 0 ReplyNot if it happened in September
A draft specification for The IBM Mathematical Formula Translating System was completed by November 1954. The first manual for FORTRAN appeared in October 1956 with the first FORTRAN compiler delivered in April 1957.
None of those milestones though...
Never mind someone found it: https://www.edn.com/1st-fortran-program-runs-september-20-1954/
5 0 ReplyPermanently Deleted
2 0 Reply
Makes it easier to repost!
9 0 Reply
Source? I'd like to read the story
Edit. https://www.edn.com/1st-fortran-program-runs-september-20-1954/
22 0 ReplyAnd the program finally completed today! 🎉
13 0 ReplyAny idea what that first program was?
8 0 ReplyI'm guessing "Hello world" followed shortly by "send nudes".
20 1 Reply
FORTRAN IV was the first language I learned to program in. Punch cards!!!
7 0 ReplyThat must've been a punch of fun
4 0 Reply
The tile flooring in the image is asbestos, fun fact
6 0 ReplyAnd you're saying it Fort_ran_?
4 0 ReplyAny names of these two people ? I'll try reverse search
3 0 ReplyThat was a mistake even back then
3 15 ReplyFortran was actually a pretty solid language, and I actually regularly use programs that still have pieces written in Fortran.
7 0 ReplyOut of curiosity, is a FORTRAN compiler at all self-bootsrapping in a manner akin to Forth? That is, you define a few primitives and then define the rest of the language in terms of those primitives?
5 0 Reply