Less accurate "models" for "thinking about software" are less accurate, and whether they were thought of first or last has no bearing on that. The fact that you

Less accurate "models" for "thinking about software" are less accurate, and whether they were thought of first or last has no bearing on that. The fact that you're using "earliest date of discovery" as supporting evidence demonstrates that you're not approaching the question as an objective observer. This isn't a popularity contest, though if you were measuring popularity based on positive impact, that of Haskell has been substantial. The only advantage to leveraging simpler and less accurate models is that they're easier for the people using them to understand at a micro scale -- at the cost of systemic accuracy and verifiability. In being less accurate, they create systems that are more difficult to understand, more difficult to abstract and compose, more difficult to optimize, and more difficult to measure. There's something destructive and anti-intellectual about trying to convince the world that deductive reasoning is just a matter of opinion.