Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The History of Programming Languages

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the in-the-beginning-was-the-command-line dept.

Programming 684

Dozix007 writes "For 50 years, computer programmers have been writing code. New technologies continue to emerge, develop, and mature at a rapid pace. Now there are more than 2,500 documented programming languages and O'Reilly has produced a poster called History of Programming Languages, which plots over 50 programming languages on a multi-layered, color-coded timeline."

cancel ×

684 comments

Great! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453682)

Now I need to go buy a 40" monitor to view the whole thing at once...

Re:Great! (5, Informative)

Jaywalk (94910) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453858)

Now I need to go buy a 40" monitor to view the whole thing at once...
Or you could buy two of their books from oreilly.com and get the poster for free by using discount code OPC79 in the shopping cart.

Unless you need an excuse to buy a 40" monitor, in which case, just forget I said anything.

Re:Great! (1)

dickeya (733264) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453958)

Time to fire up the 42" plotter! Yahoo!

Wait a minute! (5, Funny)

th1ckasabr1ck (752151) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453697)

They forgot Steve++, the crappy C++ rip-off I wrote for an independant study project back in high school.

Delphi from VBasic?? (5, Insightful)

PixelThis (690303) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453718)

Somehow I think they missed the boat on that one. Delphi is Borland's Object Pascal in a GUI driven environment.

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (4, Insightful)

LincolnQ (648660) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453789)

Which happens to "feel" exactly the same as VB. It's not simply the language syntax but also the structure, and programming in Delphi is practically the same as VB: plop objects onto a form, write code for their events. I moved from VB to Delphi with minimal effort.

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (2, Interesting)

PixelThis (690303) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453852)

Can't speak to that, I only used VB once. I'm a bit surprised though that you could move from VB to Delphi without having some background in pascal... basic and pascal weren't all that syntactically similar.

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (2, Insightful)

SoVeryWrong (576783) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453945)

Yea, but Syntax is pretty easy to learn if you already have the development fundamentals. I had a background in VB and was able to figure out and maintain a Delphi application in about 20 minutes. Granted it wasn't incredibly complex, but the syntax was pretty easy to pick up by just looking at some existing code.

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453866)

Somehow I think they missed the boat on that one. Delphi is Borland's Object Pascal in a GUI driven environment.

It seems to me that the arrows mean "inspired by"/"taking features from". You should have noticed that Delphi has two arrows pointing to its inception: one from VB, and one from Object Pascal. That seems reasonable. I don't think that's intended to mean that Delphi was created by MS or anything like that, just that it got inspiration from VB.

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (4, Interesting)

lvdrproject (626577) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453947)

Coincidentally, the guy who (for the most part) made Delphi actually left Borland and went to Microsoft, and he's now the lead architect of... C#. :o

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (1)

PixelThis (690303) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453948)

Your right, I should have noticed that. The dimmer lines (especially the lighter colored ones) are easy to lose in the background.

Re:Delphi from VBasic?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9454006)

If you look a little more closely, they have Delphi coming from both VB and Pascal. The Pascal line is a light yellow, but it is there...

Meta Programming Language (3, Funny)

xp (146294) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453724)

What we really need is a meta programming language of which all the other programming languages are special cases.

----
Your Boss Might Be A Muppet [blogspot.com]

Re:Meta Programming Language (5, Interesting)

MarkPNeyer (729607) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453741)

You can find this meta-language you speak of, if you read Godel, Escher, Bach By Douglass Hofstadter. It's called 'GLOOP'.

Re:Meta Programming Language (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453767)

There are already many such languages. C, Smalltalk, Perl and Pascal are as good as examples as anything else.

Re:Meta Programming Language (5, Funny)

dasmegabyte (267018) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453783)

Oh what, you mean like ENGLISH?

It's a pretty good language, really. Sort of esoteric and the syntax can be inscruitable at times, but you can really get some shit accomplished with it.

Re:Meta Programming Language (1)

Araneas (175181) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453904)

I was thinking that then realized that English is just a special case of the BIOS embedded in our wetware.

VMs will solve this issue (4, Interesting)

Ars-Fartsica (166957) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453814)

At some point at VM, be it JVM, Parrot, Mono/CLR runtime will become pervasive and become the de facto meta language, with specific developer-level langs simply being syntactic sugar.

One thing that has always bothered me is the lack of standards for basic syntax. Why not just have a standard for basic operators? For example does anyone really lose flexibility if we say statements are delimited by ';'? Or a standard syntax for if-then-else? e.g. perl's syntax is a pointless departure that adds no value.

Re:VMs will solve this issue (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453940)

Perhaps you should take a look at Common Lisp and its macros.

Re:VMs will solve this issue (3, Interesting)

dasmegabyte (267018) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453943)

Well, the problem is that the semi-colon is a completely arbitrary choice. And like all arbitrary choices, the only reason to continue using it is tradition. Since most of the people creating new languages are doing so to stir up tradition and do something in a way, a lot of the time the semicolon hits the cutting room floor for purely symbolic, rebellious reasons. The computer science equivalent of growing your hair out or piercing your eyebrow.

This is how we end up with completely inscruitable languages like Visual Basic. BASIC was designed to not look like a programming language and instead look like an English sentance. When we removed the line numbers, the end of a line signified the end of a statement. Of course, adding object oriented syntax to Basic made it even more apocryphal, and we ended up with the mess we have today. We can't change it, because if we did than older stuff wouldn't work. Besides, if you want to use VB with a better syntax, you can just use C# (which is either C++ without the hassles of memory management, pointers or header files or Java without the hassles of explicit declaration of exception handling, separate Get and Set methods for properties, or cross platform execution).

Re:VMs will solve this issue (4, Funny)

Tarantolato (760537) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453946)

At some point at VM, be it JVM, Parrot, Mono/CLR runtime will become pervasive and become the de facto meta language, with specific developer-level langs simply being syntactic sugar.

More likely, we'll see Stupid Language Wars replaced by Stupid VM wars.

One thing that has always bothered me is the lack of standards for basic syntax.

You can have my parentheses when you pry them from my cold, dead hands.

For example does anyone really lose flexibility if we say statements are delimited by ';'?

Fuck you.

Re:Meta Programming Language (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453853)

Its called machine code. Anything else is an abstraction (for that architecture--due to different architectures there can never be a true abstraction unless you take it all the way down to the and-or-nor-nand-xor-etc circuitry).

Its interesting to note that most people don't see history repeating itself with Java and C# (the fourth level of abstraction). The story goes as follows: in the late 60s, almost all systems programming was done in assembler(1st level), just for speed. In fact, no operating system was ever written in anything else than assembler, so there was no portable OS. People scoffed when UNIX was implemented in C (second or third level depending upon who you ask) in the mid 70s because it would be too slow. Of course computers get faster and a portable easy to edit OS took off.

Its really funny to hear people give the same arguments against Java and C# that are word-for-word the same as what was said about C.

Lisp (2, Interesting)

ultrabot (200914) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453899)

What we really need is a meta programming language of which all the other programming languages are special cases.

Lisp is it.

Other "modern" (higher level than C) languages are special cases of primordial Lisp, optimized for various niches and programmer mentalities.

This does not imply that Lisp is the best programming language (Python is ;-). Common Lisp certainly isn't.

Link is a 39x17 PDF (5, Informative)

The Angry Mick (632931) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453730)

You may want to "right-click, Save As" that puppy . . .

A program written in many of them (5, Interesting)

openSoar (89599) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453735)

The same program, written in 621 of the 2,500+ is here [99-bottles-of-beer.net] .

Re:A program written in many of them (1)

geeber (520231) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453880)

My favorite is the one written in the Cakewalk application language. It actually plays the song if you have a midi instrument. (I am assuming it is correct. I haven't bothered to run it.)

I don't see Ruby on there (0)

nanter (613346) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453738)

A pure object oriented language along the lines of Smalltalk - expected to see it down there near Smalltalk.

Re:I don't see Ruby on there (1)

PixelThis (690303) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453782)

Ruby is there, just off the end of SmallTalk, just above AppleScript.

Re:I don't see Ruby on there (1)

nanter (613346) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453846)

oops... thanks!

Re:I don't see Ruby on there (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453795)

But they had to choose relevant, important programming languages. Unfortunately ruby is another one of those niche languages that is poorly designed, archaic and only used by a couple of people, usually the designers.

Re:I don't see Ruby on there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453868)

Yes, troll, relevant languages like Self, Sather, Mesa and Fortran 2000.

And truly efficient and elegant languages like VBscript.

Ha!

Re:I don't see Ruby on there (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453817)

Follow the 'vaguely influenced by'-arrow from perl 4.000 upward. It's at Feb. 24, 1993.

In fact it's just 2 "lines" above Smalltalk, past applescript.

Re:I don't see Ruby on there (3, Interesting)

pizza_milkshake (580452) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453867)

i do. however, it would have been better if they grouped languages vertically by their relationship to one another... it looks like this has been done for some languages but not all... we'd see smaller vertical lines... for example, Rexx is at the top, but is linked to and links to 3 languages in the middle. it would make more sense, therefore, to have Rexx in the middle (or the others closer to the top)

cool programming challenge: figure out the optimal vertical order for the languages so as to minimize the length of relationship indicators

Crappy fonts (-1, Troll)

Cthefuture (665326) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453740)

What's with the crappy font? Even at 3200x1200 I can't read anything unless I zoom in to like 300%, which means I can't see very much.

The font is too bold and too small for the size of the graphic.

Re:Crappy fonts (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453918)

Well its from Orielly. Those motherfcukers dont know jack about printing anything

Re:Crappy fonts (3, Funny)

Trigun (685027) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453964)

The font is too bold and too small for the size of the graphic.

If only they would make it poster sized and ready for print!

laser printer (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453986)

I printed it out on a 1200*1200 dpi laser. It printed alright and I think it is readable. I just need a microscope to do so. I am 99% sure it is actually clear enough to read, I just need to borrow someone's microscope! :)

Starts with 3GLs. (5, Interesting)

Jaywalk (94910) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453744)

They start with FORTRAN, so they leave off the whole second generation of computer languages which was Assembler. (First generation was, of course, binary.) I remember my dad -- who was kind of a proto-geek -- talking about how excited they were when they got in a terrific new product. It was so intuitive that it was almost like talking to the computer.

He was referring to Assembler.

Re:Starts with 3GLs. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453949)

A true programmer.

After studying the electronic circuitry and in-depth assembly language programming I feel that way as well. I can talk to the computer. But unfortunately, that doesn't mean that I can do anything useful with it. It just makes you like the painter who can tell you the chemical composition of the paints and the physical laws that allow them to be applied to the canvas, yet doesn't know how to paint.

Re:Starts with 3GLs. (3, Insightful)

gray peter (539195) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453998)

Maybe a better analogy would be a painter who only has 1 bristle. You can paint the side of a building with 1 bristle, but it would take you a really really long time. That doesn't mean you couldn't do it. You can do anything in assembler if you put your mind to it (and if your mind is good enough ;-)

Autocode (2, Informative)

starling (26204) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453960)

They also missed out Autocode [computer50.org] , which was a little higher level than asembler and still predated FORTRAN.

Reminds me of (1)

WarriorPoet42 (762455) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453745)

the horrid diagram charting the evelution of *nixes. It was featured along with Sata^H^H^H^H McBride on the cover of a recent Fortune. This one seems to be slightly easier to understand, though. And it IS interesting to see where languages come from. (I imagine not everyone knows that C came from a language called B).

Re:Reminds me of (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453798)

(I imagine not everyone knows that C came from a language called B).
Ah, but where did B come from? Eh? Eh? Well? Bet you can't answer that!

Re:Reminds me of (1)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453916)

BCPL. I was lectured on Comparative Programming Languages by the guy who designed it.

Re:Reminds me of (4, Funny)

WarriorPoet42 (762455) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453925)

RTA:

FORTRAN I begot ALGOL 58 begot ALGOL 60 begot CPL begot BCPL begot B begot C begot C++

And it was good.

The text needs to be smaller (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453750)

The text should be smaller so that the target market of older geeks looking for something nostalgic need to squint more.

Logo! (2, Interesting)

Xaroth (67516) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453752)

I'm happy to see turtle-based graphics languages on there, but they appear to have missed a branch on the Logo tree. On their chart, they jump from Logo to Object Logo, but miss LogoWriter and LegoLogo.

Ok, so maybe LegoLogo is a little iffy, but LogoWriter included some pretty significant changes to Logo as a whole.

Re:Logo! (1)

dasmegabyte (267018) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453809)

They also mixed Logo II, which introduced swatchs of BASIC into Logo itself (even the line numbers!)

It was loading animal sprites and making them dance in Logo II that taught me how to program at the age of 8.

What about tie-ins to the systems? (1)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453753)

It's a little hard to understand this chart w/o understanding the systems that propagated these language shifts. Plus, it really sucks that all the versions are on the same line... it is really hard to read that information and glean any kind of useful stuff, except for the off-shoots from the other languages to form new ones. That part is cool!

From "The Tao of Programming" (5, Funny)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453754)

The Tao gave birth to machine language. Machine language gave birth to the assembler.

The assembler gave birth to the compiler. Now their are ten thousand languages.

Each language has its purpose, however humble. Each language expresses the Yin and Yang of software. Each language has its place within the Tao.

But do not program in COBOL if you can avoid it.

Real Klingon programmers (1)

incal (728144) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453756)

Dont use such silly concept as programming language. They manually set content of memory chips through arrays of switches :)

Think, what Mozilla could be with this adventurous programming technique :).

Re:Real Klingon programmers (1)

RetroGeek (206522) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453812)

They manually set content of memory chips through arrays of switches

Ah yes, paddle switches.

I used to work on a machine where you needed to load the boot-strap manually into RAM, one hex code at a time.

THEN, the machine could find the rest of the boot code, load from tape, then load from disk (a whopping 5 MBytes).

Re:Real Klingon programmers (1)

sexylicious (679192) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453851)

I can't see a Klingon having the patience to program. Nor do I see one having the patience to build a spacecraft.

"GACK AHWWQS!!" (F'ing CHEM HOMEWORK!!)

Re:Real Klingon programmers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453897)

Functions do not have 'parameters', they have ARGUMENTS!

Do we blame the acid? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453759)

The Forth, Logo and Smalltalk lines all start in the late Sixties.

Cute, aside from the chartjunk (1)

YetAnotherName (168064) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453762)

Of course, "chartjunk" as defined Edward Tufte [edwardtufte.com] . Apparently, the deriviations and timeframes of the various languages wasn't interesting enough by themselves.

Re:Cute, aside from the chartjunk (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453917)

I believe it's called "advertising". Aside from the book covers and animal logos, the chart is pretty lean.

TMI (4, Interesting)

Warlok (89470) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453774)

I think I'd like the chart a little better if it didn't distinguish between each version of each language. Major updates are OK (Fortran --> Fortran 4 --> Fortran 77, B --> C --> C++, Lisp ---> Common Lisp, etc.), but the dot versions just clutter things up.


That being said, the lighter connecting arrows between languages (Lisp to Logo, Algol to almost everything else) makes the chart easy to follow and interesting to look at.

Interesting read (3, Insightful)

JohnnyComeLately (725958) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453776)

We've been discussing this in our Software Engineering classes lately. I'm learning UML and part of the whole push to to unify all these different means and methods of software development. If you look back, it's amazing how far and how fast it's all evolved, and then subsequently, how fractured things have become as well. We can flame all day and night about Visual Basic Vs This Language or that. And no one will be definitively right. I liken it to my toolbox in the garage. I have hundreds of tools that are great in their own right. However, there's a couple dozen I use regularly.

So which couple dozen will we continue to use?

"And no one will be definitely right" (5, Insightful)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453808)

People do not typically "flame" about VB's functionality, but rather the breed of programmers and the vendor,IDE and API lock-in which accompany it.

Re:"And no one will be definitely right" (1)

nate nice (672391) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453889)

Yeah, I agree. As a language, it suits it's purpose as a quick prototyping language that is viable for graphical scripts or simple data I/O. Too bad it is not always used this way. And you're right about the breed of programmer. I've met enough people who picked up a book on VB, learned a thing or two and think they should be earning 60K+/year because they now understand Computer Science. Firstly, it's insulting and secondly, it's iggnorant. VB is the type of language you shouldn't try and make things work in; it's the type of language you use because what you would want to use is just too powerful for what you are doing.

Re:Interesting read (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453862)

Don't get your hopes up with UML... it's basically a waste of your time for real development. It makes mediocre developers feel good because they think they're doing actual design, but in reality no work is accomplished. At my company we've fired all the UML users except 1 because they almost never get anything done, and if they do get something done, what they've come up with is inflexible and short-sighted.

Re:Interesting read (1)

Cthefuture (665326) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453981)

I liken it to my toolbox in the garage. I have hundreds of tools that are great in their own right. However, there's a couple dozen I use regularly.

People always make the comparison of programming language to traditional tools. I don't understand that. A programming language, while a "tool" or sorts, is not like the tools you use to work on your house or your car.

A programming language is more like a particular automobile. That is, they all do pretty much the same thing, the difference is in style and execution (ie. how you accomplish the task at hand).

Incase of Slashdotting... (5, Funny)

GillBates0 (664202) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453794)

Here's a WhiteSpace [dur.ac.uk] script that prints the ASCII representation:


Enjoy!
/ob

Re:Incase of Slashdotting... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453886)

ass...

ActionScript?!? (5, Funny)

YetAnotherName (168064) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453797)

ActionScript 2.0 is the newest language according to this chart. And if my manager gets ahold of this, I'll end up having to program in it by the month's end!

After all, to managers, "newer, and therefore better." *sigh*

Re:ActionScript?!? (1, Informative)

leerpm (570963) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453942)

ActionScript is JavaScript/ECMAScript repurposed for the server-side.

Re:ActionScript?!? (5, Funny)

Speare (84249) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453970)

And if my manager gets ahold of this, I'll end up having to program in it by the month's end!

Don't worry. He'll hand it to Human Resources, and ask that they be on the lookout for candidates with six years of ActionScript 2.0 experience.

And then you'll lose your job to some twit who claims seven years experience in ActionScript 1.0, 2.0 *and* 3.0.

Plankalkül? (4, Insightful)

MuMart (537836) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453803)

What about Konrad Zuse's Plankalkül [epemag.com] programming language?

There is another programming language family tree on that page aswell. This was mentioned in a previous story.

oh my stars and etc ... (0, Troll)

thunderpeel (549987) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453811)

That "map" is .. uhm well .. great. WTF does it mean to non programmers?

Re:oh my stars and etc ... (1)

Diotallevi (688468) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453882)

it means your not reached true geekdom...now sit yoga style...take a drink of your fav caffinated bvg and repeat after me...hhhhuuuummmmmmmmmmmmmcooooooobbbballllllloooo mmmmmmmmmmmmceeeeeeeeeeeeeeooooommmmmmmmmpppaaaaas ssssccccaaaaaaallllluuuhhhhhmmmmmmmmmm

Re:oh my stars and etc ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453928)

Pretty much the same thing that it means to programmers, since the chart itself has little-to-no information about the languages themselves. (Only a poorly rendered vertical axis of "types" from fortran-esque up top, down through procedural, OO, scripting and finally functional stuff like LisP and Haskell.)

SmallTalk (1)

artlu (265391) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453819)

Hooray for smalltalk. I really miss using that old language, it was so diverse. Im glad to see some of the effects are still trickling into new langauges like C#. Cool site.

GroupShares.com [groupshares.com] A free and interactive stock market community. It is just getting started so check it out!

Re:SmallTalk (5, Informative)

One Louder (595430) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453941)

The original Smalltalk-80 has a direct descendent in Squeak [squeak.org] . The original Smalltalk guys, including Alan Kay and Dan Ingalls, still work on it.

It's quite impressive how it has evolved, and is still one of the most entertaining software environments around.

Re:SmallTalk (1)

One Louder (595430) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453978)

Hmmm, it looks like that site is down - try here [uiuc.edu] instead.

Same here but much more readable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453820)

... and existing for a while now [levenez.com] . The same exists for Open Systems (UNIX) and Closed Systems (Windows) history on the same site [levenez.com] .

What amazes me (1)

sparkywonderchicken (759502) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453824)

Most languages refuse to die even when they are of no further use or I should say other languages are much more useful and efficient at doing the same job. If this were the case in "real life" we'd be speaking Celtic2004 or LatinIso3

How... (1)

Hangin10 (704729) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453826)

It might have plenty of omissions but I
still want to print it out...

How the heck do I print it? The print
dialog will only let me print either
the part right in the middle taking up
a page, or squeeze the thing on to one
page...

Be nice if they would let us order
a free (real) poster...

I'm Confused. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453833)

I don't see BrainFuck anywhere on that graph. Is this the "PG" version? And when is the movie coming out?

Check out Lisp (5, Interesting)

Rhesus Piece (764852) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453840)

Whoa.
It seems that Lisp holds the record for
"Longest Lived Language That Is Still Relevant Yet Underappreciated"

It just amazes me that something concieved that long ago is still going strong. I guess it makes sense, as it was concieved initially as a language for describing algorithms, then later implemented. With abstraction on the rise as it seems to be, this quality of being much closer to theory than practice is quite a useful one.

Actionscript (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453863)

Interesting. I didn't know that ActionScript had derived from ECMAScript - I always thought it derived from JavaScript. And before you flame me, see my journal where I've already refuted anything you're about to say about Flash.

KSH (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453869)

They forgot ksh which had control structures based upon Algol68.

Also ECMASCRIPT was derived from JavaScript which isn't shown that way on this.

Publising these sorts of diagrams id fine, so long as they get it right. When its wrong/incomplete, it probably does more harm than good.

Re:KSH (1)

chill (34294) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453987)

KSH is there. Follow the sh line almost to the end.

HyperTalk? (2, Interesting)

adavies42 (746183) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453870)

Did anyone spot HyperTalk on there? If nothing else, it should be there as the ancestor or influence of AppleScript.

A half centry of coding! (5, Funny)

rocjoe71 (545053) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453873)

For 50 years, computer programmers have been writing code.

For 49.5 years, computer programmers have been saying "but it worked on *my* computer"!

What? No Algol 68 - C link? (1)

jejones (115979) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453881)

If for no other reason than the "long" type modifier and the cast notion (if not the syntax).

FORTRAN RULES (1)

thbigr (514105) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453906)

Wow, I came a long and F4.0 was realy cool... if then else.

But this was realy cool to read. I am sure most tick of the languages they have used.

Functional programming languages dying? F# XSLT? (5, Interesting)

3770 (560838) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453911)

Aaah, the nostalgia!

Anyway, I didn't see any programming language versions for functional languages (the ones I recognize are Haskell, ML and Miranda) after some time in -99.

Does that mean that they are dying out?

I've heard rumors of F# from Microsoft but I don't know if that is true.

It would be a pity if functional languages would die at this point in time since proponents of functional languages always used the argument that "they may be slow now but they scale really well on massively parallell computer systems" (because of no side effects) and we are at the brink of seeing multi-processor systems starting to go mainstream.

On a separate note, XSLT, which isn't a programming language in the traditional sense, is functional in its design. I think the designers of XSLT really put some thought into it. In any event, XSLT doesn't have any side effects, making it a functional language in a sense, and this means that it also should scale really well on massively parallell systems.

So, I guess the theory behind functional languages live on in one of the hottest technologies around today.

Also, the last version of Prolog was in -97. Pity, you can really do some magic in that language.

DUPE! (0, Troll)

Kehl (663202) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453912)

Dupe [slashdot.org]

Re:DUPE! (0, Offtopic)

mtwalkup (745000) | more than 10 years ago | (#9454001)

ANOTHER DUPE! www.slashdot.org and slashdot.org are showing the SAME stories! Imagine that!

Where's INTERCAL? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9453913)

The most important programming language of the 20th century seems to be missing from this diagram. Those wankers at O'Reilly don't know anything! Everything that I program here at work over the past seven years has been in Intercal.
I'm guessing it would be an offshoot of BASIC.

TDz.

Circular... (4, Funny)

Unnngh! (731758) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453919)

There's a lot of crossover between the languages, and a lot of hybrid influences. In fact, some of these seem to play back into each other. I predict that in another 50 years, the chart will have completed its loop and there will be only one language:

Fortran 2060!

wait for it... (1)

ptrangerv8 (644515) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453924)

But where's *nix????

oh wait, wrong response for the thread.... /pathetic attempt at humor

AutoLisp anyone? (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453930)

I see that Lisp gets a mention there but AutoLisp doesn't. Does anyone know if AutoLisp counts as a programming language per se?

O'Reilly's favorites go furthest right (2, Insightful)

DavidNWelton (142216) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453937)

O'Reilly's favorite/bestselling books are the ones with the arrows extended furthest to the right.

How could they leave off Brainf*** (3, Insightful)

kingj02 (698534) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453955)

How could you not like a language [muppetlabs.com] whose syntax is > < + - . , [ ]

Its also the smallest compiler ever written.

Delphi is based on Pascal (1)

nbdy (684290) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453956)

Definitely is much more Pascal than Basic.

The secret to doing COBOL projects (0)

Markvs (17298) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453972)

Need to get a project done in Cobol in a hurry?

Step 1) Find a Russian that can program in Cobol.
Step 2) Lock in a room with 30 PCs and 29 other (can even be previously non-computer using) Russians. Allow 48 hours, with generous room services.
Step 3) Profit!

Note: The Russian in step 1 must also speak your language! If not, and you speak no Russian, the project may grow or shrink in direct proportion to quality of room services in step 2!

-Markvs

Lifelines (1)

foo fighter (151863) | more than 10 years ago | (#9453984)

Does the length of each line signify anything, or is it an arbitrary design element?

Actionscript is way over to the right, Fortran stops around 2003, but C and C++ seem to have died around 2001. Sup wit dat?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...