Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An evaluation of programming languages and language features for engineering software development

  • Published:
Engineering with Computers Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article addresses the need for engineers to have a working knowledge of the fundamental structures of computer programming languages. In pursuit of this, it briefly looks at the history behind four of the more well-known programming languages. It then attempts to identify, and to look critically at, the attributes of programming languages that significantly affect the production of engineering software. The four “traditional” procedural programming languages chosen for review are those intended for scientific and general purpose programmin—FORTRAN-77, C, Pascal, and Modula-2. These languages are compared and some general observations are made.

The emphasis of this article is on the attributes, characteristics, and components of programming languages that are important to software development and maintenance. Consequently, the comparison itself is of secondary importance, with the actual methodology of comparison given prominence in order that professional engineers who need to develop engineering software are able to make rational decisions about the choice of a programming language. Choosing an appropriate language can be a complex task and many factors must be considered. Therefore, in this article the fundamental structures, constructs, and attributes of programming languages are discussed, with very little attention given to the specific syntax of any particular language.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rasdorf, W.J.; Storaasli, O.O. Educational fundamentals of computer aided engineering. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Ed., Pergamon Press 3(3), 247–254

  2. Goldberg, A. (1984) Smalltalk-80—The Interactive Programming Environment. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

    Google Scholar 

  3. Backus, J. (1981) The history of FORTRAN I, II and III. In: History of Programming Languages (Ed. R.L. Wexelblat). New York: Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  4. Kernighan, B.W.; Ritchie, D.M. (1978) The C Programming Language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jensen, K.; Wirth, N. (1978) PASCAL User Manual and Report, 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wirth, N. (1982) Programming in Modula-2, 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer-Verlag

    Google Scholar 

  7. Wulf, W.A.; Shaw, M.; Hilfinger, P.N.; Flon, L. (1981) Fundamental Structures of Computer Science. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

    Google Scholar 

  8. Elson, M. (1973) Concepts of Programming Languages. Chicago: Science Research Associates

    Google Scholar 

  9. MacLennan, B.J. (1983) Principles of Programming Languages: Design, Evaluation, and Implementation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston

    Google Scholar 

  10. Shaw, M.; Almes, G.T.; Newcomer, J.N.; Reid, B.K.; Wulf, W.A. (1981) A comparison of programming languages for software engineering. Sofw. Pract. Exp. 11(1), January, pp. 1–52. Also excerpted in A. Feuer; N. Gehani (Eds.) (1984) Comparing and Asessing Programming Languages: Ada, C and Pascal. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  11. American National Standards Committee. (1978) American National Standard Programming Language FORTRAN (FORTRAN 77). Document X3J3/90, X3 Secretariat, CBEMA/Standards, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  12. Katzan, H. (1978) FORTRAN 77. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold

    Google Scholar 

  13. BYTE Magazine. (1983) Special Issue on C. August

  14. Atkinson, L. (1981) Pascal Programming. Chichester, UK: Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  15. BYTE Magazine. (1984) Special Issue on Modula-2. August

  16. Pomberger, G. (1984) Software Engineering and Modula-2. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  17. Coar, D. (1984) Pascal, Ada, and Modula-2: A system programmer's comparison BYTE, August

  18. Feuer, A.; Gehani, N. (Eds.) (1984) Comparing and Assessing Programming Languages: Ada, C and Pascal. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pratt, T.W. (1984) Programming Languages: Design and Implementation, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wirth, N. (1984) Programming languages: What to demand and how to assess them. In: Comparing and Assessing Programming Languages: Ada, C and Pascal (Eds. A. Feuer, N. Gehani). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

    Google Scholar 

  21. Holtz, N.M.; Rasdorf, W.J. (1983) LISP-A CAD system programming language. J. Tech. Top. Civ. Eng., ASCE 109(1), 58–72

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carlton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

    Neal M. Holtz

  2. North Carolina State University, Box 7908, 27695-7908, Raleigh, North Carolina

    William J. Rasdorf (Associate Professor of Civil Engineering and Computer Science)

Authors
  1. Neal M. Holtz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William J. Rasdorf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Holtz, N.M., Rasdorf, W.J. An evaluation of programming languages and language features for engineering software development. Engineering with Computers 3, 183–199 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01202140

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01202140

Keywords

Search

Navigation