&gt; Now, if Bloomberg&#x27;s code is a spaghetti monster (I have no idea), that is a problem. But that is a problem of legacy code, not a &#x27;Fortran&#x27; problem.<p>This I think is the key point: lots of time when I&#x27;ve seen people <i>mistake</i> a practices problem like this (that result in expensive-to-maintain &quot;legacy&quot; code) with implementation language problems, they end up doing a conversion to a new language (often doing the <i>worst</i> thing you can do with a poorly specified, poorly documented, but basically <i>working</i> codebase, a &quot;big-bang&quot; replacement rather than an incremental one) without fixing the process issues, and so end up creating a new poorly-specified, poorly-documented, often less-well-working &quot;instant legacy&quot; codebase that just happens to be in a currently-fashionable language.