While I was thinking about the history of programming languages recently, I remembered slides I once made, showing a (simplified) family/influence/history diagram of languages.
Shared he in case it’s useful to anyone.
(It was made many years ago, so not up to date after 2010 – sorry. And I fully expect your comments correcting my interpretations…)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/aa653/aa6538a991436f3e106b92466b5186c0144c4fb1" alt="A graph showing several programming languages from 1957 to 2012 and their relationships"
Some programming languages and their relationships (up to 2010)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f643e/f643ea621ef69ecd91bc0a6781e7d810e726012e" alt="The same graph as above, but with languages highlighted that use C-style syntax"
Languages with C-style syntax
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5b81f/5b81fabff468e88395ede164e92b95c7a25e46dc" alt="The same graph as above, but with functional languages highlighted"
Functional languages (some languages intentionally on the border…)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/54c10/54c10527326e3d6a27a02181cb84ac2c68b29fcf" alt="The same graph as above, but with object-oriented languages highlighted"
Object-oriented languages (some languages intentionally on the border)
Here is a PDF file with the same diagrams.
Nice. I’ve seen some much more complex ones than this, but it is useful nonetheless.
I think that it is a little misleading to position JavaScript so close to Java – it has little more in common with Java than with most other languages that use the C-derived syntax. Of more significance, I believe, is the – missing – connection between Self and JavaScript. JavaScript’s unusual approach to OOP – based on the concept of ‘prototypes’ rather than classes came straight from Self.
I remember David Ungar (Self) speaking at OOPSLA in 2002 (or thereabouts). He said that the mistake he had made with Self was that he had used square brackets – no realising that the future lay in curly brackets. (It was definitely tongue-in-cheek – he has a very dry sense of humour).