Hey, I thought that FORTRAN died when that big meteor hit Earth 65 million years ago? And all those old FORTRAN programmer dinosaurs slowly vanished being replaced by more nimble, less resource hungry, C++ programmers?

Never thought that BOINC was a legacy program! ;)

---

Hey, I thought that FORTRAN died when that big meteor hit Earth 65 million years ago? And all those old FORTRAN programmer dinosaurs slowly vanished being replaced by more nimble, less resource hungry, C++ programmers?

Never thought that BOINC was a legacy program! ;)

This error comes from Predictor, not BOINC

And no, FORTRAN is alive and well in scientific computing.

What sucks here is the dialog box, not the fortran -- predictor hits this on a remote box and box grinds to a halt ;-(

Its enoigh to make me abandon P@h as soon as I get just
1 more cobblestone...

---

Its enoigh to make me abandon P@h as soon as I get just
1 more cobblestone...

Yeah, I've seen this grinding to a halt all too often now. Not long ago, I decided to quit SETI, I couldn't see any more gain (in my strick opinion), scientifc gain that is after all these years even if I know there's only a tiny fragment of data computed yet and so much more to go.

So I decided to venture a bit, in septembre, I fell that predictor meant these standards of mine but wasn't quite ready to quit SETI yet.

Someone did clear my mistake as I couldn't believe that BOINC itself could be anywhere near writen in fortran. But thanks for the clarification here also.

It's funny when you think about it, BOINC opened up the world community global project aspects even more. But at the same time, this opening up kind of deals a deadly blow to the philosophy of "global community" as I can very well see, years from now, Universities running their own BOINC for any and all internal student projects. The more projects you have, the more diluted the global CPU power.

For every one gain, a loss.

---

The more projects you have, the more diluted the global CPU power.

For every one gain, a loss.

But if more people participate, then the computing power increases, and we will have more gain than loss.

---

Join TeamACC

Sometimes I think we are alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we are not. In either case the idea is quite staggering.

I remember, in school, our Fortran classes, I still hear the noise of the giant printer that would spit out sheet after sheet of perforated paper of fortran coding lines. You'd get from time to time a little graphic made of stars

************
* *
* *
************

With whatever text inside. Back then, I was hoping for the computer to actually crash or better yet, the server to crash! Of course, my pain wasn't over yet, then came dBase IV.

ugh.

---

But if more people participate, then the computing power increases, and we will have more gain than loss.

Actually, no.. that wasn't quite my point. The more projects doesn't mean more people of course as you reach a saturation mark. No, on the contrary, the more people the lessen the CPU power for each project has less people participating.

1 million people, 2 projects, 500,000 people.
1 million people, 500 projects... you get my point.

---