palae

Fair enough. I was thinking of operations like getting row i from a n*m matrix, which would be A(i,:) in 1-based compared to A(i-1,:) in 0-based (or A(i,:) with a 0..n-1 index).

At least in scientific computing, that would not be the case, quite the opposite in fact.

It seems only logical that (a) growing plants to eat them is more efficient than (b) bringing an animal into existence, feeding the animal with said plants and then eating the animal.

So (b) is more polluting and more cruel than (a). It might be time to wonder if it is worth it.

Sure, if you try with non conformable arrays, gfortran for example would tell you something like this:

  Different shape for array assignment at (1) on dimension 1

Note that a scalar is conformable to any array, so that A = 2 for example would work for any shape of A, and would fill A with 2's.

I honestly am not too sure why there is so much derision regarding Fortran (ageism?). A lot of people don't seem to realize the importance this language still has in scientific computing.

I think the answer is closer to 10 years, as ln( 3500 / 48 ) / ln( 48 / 31 ) = 9.8

In 4.72 years, they would be at 48 * ( 48 / 31 )^4.72 = 378 millions / day.