Some C++ folk seem to think so, but they're wrong!
Good points and interesting figures on the usage of Archer. You caused me to check up a vaguely remembered comment about the future of programming languages - it turns out to be from Tony Hoare (FRS and winner of the 1980 Turing Award) in 1982. He said I don't know what the language of the year 2000 will look like, but I know it will be called Fortran.” It would be a stretch to claim that "The language of the year 2022 is Fortran" but it is certainly the case that what is called Fortran today is not the Fortran I learned in 1972. By the way, the article from 2014 which quoted Hoare makes interesting reading alongside yours - https://arstechnica.com/science/2014/05/scientific-computings-future-can-any-coding-language-top-a-1950s-behemoth/
It was awhile ago, but the Texas Instruments supercomputers, 7 of which were built in the late 1970s were optimized for FORTRAN. To take advantage of that, everything possible including the Cobol compilers were written in FORTRAN.
Always love your write ups. Very informative and fun to read 😊👏
Gilles Gouaillardet pointed out on Twitter that GROMACS is written in C++, not C. https://twitter.com/giIIes/status/1572964309092945920?s=20&t=PG7befscq2l5zvE34HNb9Q
Looking at their installation manual you need both C and C++17 compilers. I'll update the script to say it is C++, but that doesn't affect any of the conclusions about Fortran, merely changes the balance in any C vs C++ battle someone may choose to fight :-)