4 ms·

Yes to all that but still, my pet theory is that languages rise on one or two "killer features" that move the entire industry forward, and not the overall cuten

by mojuba 2mo ago

Yes to all that but still, my pet theory is that languages rise on one or two "killer features" that move the entire industry forward, and not the overall cuteness or lovability. I can suggest a list of one killer feature per each popular language, i.e. things that these languages were the first to introduce and influence many successors: C: extreme conciseness C++: implicit destructors / RAII Python: removed curly braces Java: extreme portability JavaScript: erm... PHP: embedded in HTML by design Rust: compile-time memory management Swift: structured concurrency (pre-6 was probably just pure cuteness) etc.

armchairhacker 2mo ago
I believe JavaScript's was running in the web where Java could not (iPhones) or was considered too heavyweight (no startup). Then it became the true extremely portable language, because developers wanted a single language to write webapps in, and it was easier to get JavaScript running on their server than a new language running on every browser.
- Jtsummers 2mo ago
  Javascript didn't need a plugin, unlike Java, and could directly alter the page contents. One of the first heavy uses was Google Maps, interactive JS-based applications took off at that point. Then with an army of web developers (meaning in browser), Node took off when it handed them a way to work on the backend in the same language. The iPhone came out after JS heavy pages came into existence, and might have accelerated the end of Flash and Java applets but the trend was already there.
  - oblio 2mo ago
    Gmail was the original AJAX woah! JavaScript application.
    - WalterSlovotsky 2mo ago
      Somewhat ironic, since AJAX was originally created by Microsoft to implement the Outlook web client.
      - oblio 2mo ago
        Microsoft was early and late to lots of things. They dominated early smartphones, too.
systems 2mo ago
C++ succeeded because it was Object Oriented, people didn't start talking about RAII as C++ killer feature until years later python succeeded because it wasn't Perl's TMTOWTDI, everyone expected ruby to overtake python, but .. for some reason that never happened swift succeeded because apple pushed it to replace objective c, that if you consider swift succeeded anyway, i agree with your premise, languages need one key strategic advantage feature to succeed, but you just got it wrong on few of them .. and if i am wrong too, then the premise is weak, if we are not sure what the killer feature is, we then have no idea why the language succeeded
- Zak 2mo ago
  I don't think C++ succeeded because it was object-oriented. I think C++ was object-oriented because classes were an abstraction that could layer on top of C with fairly low overhead, giving it more expressive power without much mandatory cost to size or speed. In other words, object-orientation was the means, not the end.
  - mojuba 2mo ago
    Agreed and that's probably the second major killer feature of C++.
  - IsTom 2mo ago
    Back then OOP was all the hype and inheritance was cool.
    - Zak 2mo ago
      C++ predated the OOP hype cycle and triggered, or at least accelerated it.
- shagie 2mo ago
  > python succeeded because it wasn't Perl's TMTOWTDI, everyone expected ruby to overtake python, but .. for some reason that never happened Ruby allows (and to some extent encourages) unreasonable code. It's not bad code (and in some cases extremely elegant), but it's code you can't reason about. Being able to open any class (or object) and add new methods to it makes tracking how execution works extremely difficult. The language allows for very undisciplined things to work - its great for the "scripting" and rapid prototyping - but unless you're going to throw it away the next day of having to maintain that code it starts weighing on the future speed of working. Undisciplined code can be handled by making sure everyone on the team is disciplined in its use and documenting how things work... but that rarely reflects reality. And so, you move to a language that enforces more discipline in how one uses it and is more reasonable in its execution.
cedilla 2mo ago
Except for PHP I don't think that's a very fitting list. C for example, is not really a concise language, not even for its time - APL is much more concise. C is rather verbose. Likewise, Python is not the first language without braces - and it debuted before braces became the industry standard. I guess ISWIM or ABC are the first to have syntactic whitespace. Really, you will always find an earlier example for a "killer feature", at least in an academic context - in the case of your list, usually in the 1960s, in the 1970s at the latest.
benrutter 2mo ago
I like that theory, if I was going to counter it though, I'd say that I'm not sure those features match what language users talk about. For instance: - C: Users often praise the simplicity of the language - C++: Users often praise (not always praise?) the large feature set for a low level language - Python: Folks talk a lot about "batteries included". Although in all honesty, I think having good interaction with other low-level languages is Python's secret feature. - Java: Really leans in hard to object oriented programming - JavaScript: Haha, you have to use it! Not sure I'm really disagreeing with you though, but I think Java promoted its portability much more than it's ever been used (obviously there are cases like Spark which uses the JVM portability).
Jtsummers 2mo ago
C came with an OS. C++ came with compatibility with C and at the peak or near peak of OO hype. Javascript came with the browser making it probably the most widely available language platform. Swift came with Objective-C compatibility, an OS, and money (iOS app store customers spend more on apps than their Android counterparts). Coming with a platform that is widely available or compatibility with an existing language on a platform was the killer feature for each.
- bobajeff 2mo ago
  Yeah, this is a more honest assessment than the others I've read here. Of course them being ISO(like) standards with competing implementations/tools was also important for C, C++ and Java as the cost to use and learn them was higher in the days before free open source languages, free tutorials and help forums became so wide spread. But yeah official platform support and big company backing are a big part of why these languages have stuck around compared to others.
- pjmlp 2mo ago
  Java came with Applets/Web, VB and Delphi with Windows, TP with cheap compilers for PC on top of Pascal university adoption,....
chpatrick 2mo ago
JS despite its (many) faults still allowed a fairly functional style way before that was mainstream. Java and C++ only got lambdas decades later.
- oblio 2mo ago
  Let's be real here. JavaScript didn't take off because it was functional in the functional programming sense. It took off because it was built in and procedural. You didn't need to muck around with objects if you were a total noob. You'd just write your functions and call them with strings as parameters.
  - bluGill 2mo ago
    Javascript took off because it was your only option for a lot of things. Flash and Java tried, but both were always hit and miss as to who could use it. Everybody had javascript in their browser so you had no choice if you were to reach them but meet them where they were.
- agos 2mo ago
  and despite all of its shortcomings, the ecosystem really grew. There are mainstream languages that to this day still can't match npm (looking at you, Python)
GuB-42 2mo ago
C is not "extremely concise". Lisp, and especially APL both predate C and are more concise. To me, the "killer feature" of C is UNIX, we can't really separate them, C won because UNIX won and vice versa. Other than that it is reasonably concise, reasonably portable and reasonably low level. The language itself doesn't have any "killer feature". For Python, I think its killer feature, related to the removal of curly braces is that it is a dynamic language (like Perl) that forces you to write somewhat readable code. You have no choice but to indent correctly, and there is a strong "pythonic" ideal way of coding, the complete opposite of Perl's "more than one way to do it". JavaScript killer feature is obviously its integration in browsers but it is also well designed for this task, with pretty good support for asynchronous programming. Still, I don't think any of these languages were successful for their "killer features", more because of a combinations of many things. In many cases, they weren't even the first. For example, there are several langages that use indentation as syntax that predate Python. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-side_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-side_rule )
jcranmer 2mo ago
To have a theory of success, you have to also be able to explain failure. Why did object-oriented C (aka C++) take off but object-oriented Pascal (aka Delphi) not, despite the fact that Pascal was as prevalent as C in those days? Why was Python able to overturn Perl's dominance in the scripting space, but Ruby was unable to do so? Why did Ada and Smalltalk never achieve significant dominance? A lot of success does come down to being in the right place at the right time. JS was successful because it was the only available scripting language for the web (although MS pushed VBScript for a bit) when there was a concerted effort to kill off the Java and Flash plugins. C was successful because it was tied to the Unix OS, which happened to overtake other OSes for a variety of reasons.
npn 2mo ago
this is just survivorship bias. I bet you 1000 dollars that there exists hundred languages that are more useful and well thought than those languages you listed, but still nobody cared and it died. I believe the reason lies entirely outside of the language itself. let just say, the is a circle, a society (of programmer and related peopel) that decide that a language can be popular or not. if your language get picked, then it will be popular, if not, then good luck. you can deduce easily what the criteria (to be picked) from the list of languages you mentioned: 1. if it does not come from US, good luck (ruby is an exception but it didn't sail until some americans decide to boost it) 2. if the language authors do not speech english well, good luck (I mean, sure if you advertise your language more more people will pick it) 3. if you satisfy 2 previous conditions, if you do not play along well with those people in the circle, then good luck (D is a good example of this) 4. even your programming language is dog shit, as long as you know the people in the circle, they will promote it for you. bonus point: if you allow the language to be directed as they want, then it will be extra smooth. tl;dr: it is mostly politic how a programming language gets popular.
lenkite 2mo ago
Swift: (reaon reason->) only Apple recommended language of choice for SwiftUI and iOS/macOS development. Swift could be the worst language in the planet and people would still learn it. For considerable amount of time, its compiler used to timeout for many code-bases and people still gritted their teeth and learned it.

by mojuba 2mo ago

armchairhacker 2mo ago

I believe JavaScript's was running in the web where Java could not (iPhones) or was considered too heavyweight (no startup). Then it became the true extremely portable language, because developers wanted a single language to write webapps in, and it was easier to get JavaScript running on their server than a new language running on every browser.

Jtsummers 2mo ago
Javascript didn't need a plugin, unlike Java, and could directly alter the page contents. One of the first heavy uses was Google Maps, interactive JS-based applications took off at that point. Then with an army of web developers (meaning in browser), Node took off when it handed them a way to work on the backend in the same language. The iPhone came out after JS heavy pages came into existence, and might have accelerated the end of Flash and Java applets but the trend was already there.
- oblio 2mo ago
  Gmail was the original AJAX woah! JavaScript application.
  - WalterSlovotsky 2mo ago
    Somewhat ironic, since AJAX was originally created by Microsoft to implement the Outlook web client.
    - oblio 2mo ago
      Microsoft was early and late to lots of things. They dominated early smartphones, too.

systems 2mo ago

C++ succeeded because it was Object Oriented, people didn't start talking about RAII as C++ killer feature until years later python succeeded because it wasn't Perl's TMTOWTDI, everyone expected ruby to overtake python, but .. for some reason that never happened swift succeeded because apple pushed it to replace objective c, that if you consider swift succeeded anyway, i agree with your premise, languages need one key strategic advantage feature to succeed, but you just got it wrong on few of them .. and if i am wrong too, then the premise is weak, if we are not sure what the killer feature is, we then have no idea why the language succeeded

Zak 2mo ago
I don't think C++ succeeded because it was object-oriented. I think C++ was object-oriented because classes were an abstraction that could layer on top of C with fairly low overhead, giving it more expressive power without much mandatory cost to size or speed. In other words, object-orientation was the means, not the end.
- mojuba 2mo ago
  Agreed and that's probably the second major killer feature of C++.
- IsTom 2mo ago
  Back then OOP was all the hype and inheritance was cool.
  - Zak 2mo ago
    C++ predated the OOP hype cycle and triggered, or at least accelerated it.
shagie 2mo ago
> python succeeded because it wasn't Perl's TMTOWTDI, everyone expected ruby to overtake python, but .. for some reason that never happened Ruby allows (and to some extent encourages) unreasonable code. It's not bad code (and in some cases extremely elegant), but it's code you can't reason about. Being able to open any class (or object) and add new methods to it makes tracking how execution works extremely difficult. The language allows for very undisciplined things to work - its great for the "scripting" and rapid prototyping - but unless you're going to throw it away the next day of having to maintain that code it starts weighing on the future speed of working. Undisciplined code can be handled by making sure everyone on the team is disciplined in its use and documenting how things work... but that rarely reflects reality. And so, you move to a language that enforces more discipline in how one uses it and is more reasonable in its execution.

cedilla 2mo ago

Except for PHP I don't think that's a very fitting list. C for example, is not really a concise language, not even for its time - APL is much more concise. C is rather verbose. Likewise, Python is not the first language without braces - and it debuted before braces became the industry standard. I guess ISWIM or ABC are the first to have syntactic whitespace. Really, you will always find an earlier example for a "killer feature", at least in an academic context - in the case of your list, usually in the 1960s, in the 1970s at the latest.

benrutter 2mo ago

I like that theory, if I was going to counter it though, I'd say that I'm not sure those features match what language users talk about. For instance: - C: Users often praise the simplicity of the language - C++: Users often praise (not always praise?) the large feature set for a low level language - Python: Folks talk a lot about "batteries included". Although in all honesty, I think having good interaction with other low-level languages is Python's secret feature. - Java: Really leans in hard to object oriented programming - JavaScript: Haha, you have to use it! Not sure I'm really disagreeing with you though, but I think Java promoted its portability much more than it's ever been used (obviously there are cases like Spark which uses the JVM portability).

Jtsummers 2mo ago

C came with an OS. C++ came with compatibility with C and at the peak or near peak of OO hype. Javascript came with the browser making it probably the most widely available language platform. Swift came with Objective-C compatibility, an OS, and money (iOS app store customers spend more on apps than their Android counterparts). Coming with a platform that is widely available or compatibility with an existing language on a platform was the killer feature for each.

bobajeff 2mo ago
Yeah, this is a more honest assessment than the others I've read here. Of course them being ISO(like) standards with competing implementations/tools was also important for C, C++ and Java as the cost to use and learn them was higher in the days before free open source languages, free tutorials and help forums became so wide spread. But yeah official platform support and big company backing are a big part of why these languages have stuck around compared to others.
pjmlp 2mo ago
Java came with Applets/Web, VB and Delphi with Windows, TP with cheap compilers for PC on top of Pascal university adoption,....

chpatrick 2mo ago

JS despite its (many) faults still allowed a fairly functional style way before that was mainstream. Java and C++ only got lambdas decades later.

oblio 2mo ago
Let's be real here. JavaScript didn't take off because it was functional in the functional programming sense. It took off because it was built in and procedural. You didn't need to muck around with objects if you were a total noob. You'd just write your functions and call them with strings as parameters.
- bluGill 2mo ago
  Javascript took off because it was your only option for a lot of things. Flash and Java tried, but both were always hit and miss as to who could use it. Everybody had javascript in their browser so you had no choice if you were to reach them but meet them where they were.
agos 2mo ago
and despite all of its shortcomings, the ecosystem really grew. There are mainstream languages that to this day still can't match npm (looking at you, Python)

GuB-42 2mo ago

C is not "extremely concise". Lisp, and especially APL both predate C and are more concise. To me, the "killer feature" of C is UNIX, we can't really separate them, C won because UNIX won and vice versa. Other than that it is reasonably concise, reasonably portable and reasonably low level. The language itself doesn't have any "killer feature". For Python, I think its killer feature, related to the removal of curly braces is that it is a dynamic language (like Perl) that forces you to write somewhat readable code. You have no choice but to indent correctly, and there is a strong "pythonic" ideal way of coding, the complete opposite of Perl's "more than one way to do it". JavaScript killer feature is obviously its integration in browsers but it is also well designed for this task, with pretty good support for asynchronous programming. Still, I don't think any of these languages were successful for their "killer features", more because of a combinations of many things. In many cases, they weren't even the first. For example, there are several langages that use indentation as syntax that predate Python. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-side_rule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-side_rule )

jcranmer 2mo ago

To have a theory of success, you have to also be able to explain failure. Why did object-oriented C (aka C++) take off but object-oriented Pascal (aka Delphi) not, despite the fact that Pascal was as prevalent as C in those days? Why was Python able to overturn Perl's dominance in the scripting space, but Ruby was unable to do so? Why did Ada and Smalltalk never achieve significant dominance? A lot of success does come down to being in the right place at the right time. JS was successful because it was the only available scripting language for the web (although MS pushed VBScript for a bit) when there was a concerted effort to kill off the Java and Flash plugins. C was successful because it was tied to the Unix OS, which happened to overtake other OSes for a variety of reasons.

npn 2mo ago

this is just survivorship bias. I bet you 1000 dollars that there exists hundred languages that are more useful and well thought than those languages you listed, but still nobody cared and it died. I believe the reason lies entirely outside of the language itself. let just say, the is a circle, a society (of programmer and related peopel) that decide that a language can be popular or not. if your language get picked, then it will be popular, if not, then good luck. you can deduce easily what the criteria (to be picked) from the list of languages you mentioned: 1. if it does not come from US, good luck (ruby is an exception but it didn't sail until some americans decide to boost it) 2. if the language authors do not speech english well, good luck (I mean, sure if you advertise your language more more people will pick it) 3. if you satisfy 2 previous conditions, if you do not play along well with those people in the circle, then good luck (D is a good example of this) 4. even your programming language is dog shit, as long as you know the people in the circle, they will promote it for you. bonus point: if you allow the language to be directed as they want, then it will be extra smooth. tl;dr: it is mostly politic how a programming language gets popular.

lenkite 2mo ago

Swift: (reaon reason->) only Apple recommended language of choice for SwiftUI and iOS/macOS development. Swift could be the worst language in the planet and people would still learn it. For considerable amount of time, its compiler used to timeout for many code-bases and people still gritted their teeth and learned it.