Hacker News Reader

Comment by staunch | Hacker News Reader

                                  /-> Ruby on Rails
    C++ -> Java -> Perl -> PHP -> 
                                  \--> Python

View on HN

What is this diagram supposed to mean? Apparently it's not "X evolved from Y" as, say, Perl is not derived from Java. It also can't be "X was popular (for web applications) after Y" as surely Perl was more popular prior to Java and C++ was never really popular in this area (and continues to be popular in others). "X is superior to Y" would be comparing apples to oranges. What am I missing?

I think he's trying to show the progression of the popular consensus of "the new web framework". Either that or he's showing what he thinks is the average developer's progression through frameworks.

My alternate one is showing what I think is the popular consensus of which framework to use. It branches out at the end because we don't have consensus yet.

Yours is more like it, but I think there's little point in including C++ in the lot. It hasn't ever really been used for web application development, at least not nearly to the same extent as the other languages in the original diagram.

By the time the Internet took off in the early 90s, Perl was already around and much more popular for this purpose.

If you're going for rather exotic languages (in the context of web application development) I think it would make more sense to include Common Lisp.

Apparently okcupid is coded in C++, and they're proud of that fact. It blows my mind.

My guess is that he was trying for the programmers hierarchy in ASCII: http://i.imgur.com/G7WyP.gif

    C++ --> Java --> Java
                 \--> Ruby on Rails
                  \--> Python/Django,etc…
                   \--> Javascript/Node.js/Sammy, etc…
                    \--> Scala/Lift                     
    PHP ----------------> (still going…)
    Perl -----> (???)

This is kind of nonsensical.

Ruby and PHP are direct descendants of Perl (which is still going). Ruby merged Perl with Smalltalk, roughly, and PHP merged Perl with a box of hammers (nevermind that not all problems involve nails), while removing a number of "hard" features in Perl, like first-class functions and closures.

Python is not on the C++/Java timeline, either, coming from ABC and others.

JavaScript is a descendant of Scheme (with C-like syntax).

Scala/Lift is not popular enough to really deserve mention among the rest of this bunch of languages, all the rest of which have been extraordinarily popular and used by millions of programmers.

I read this as the progression of the poster's use of languages and not a table of heritage.

How does the Perl "???" fit into that theory? Wouldn't the poster know whether he's still using Perl or not?

I think he means that he has no idea what former perl users have converted to using.

Most of them would have moved onto Perl web frameworks. Rough timeline would be:

    Perl --> cgi
         \--> mod_perl
          \--> Mason
           \--> CGI::Application
            \--> Maypole --> Catalyst
                         \--> Jifty
                          \--> Mojolicious
                           \--> Dancer
                            \--> Squatting
                  \--> Continuity         
                   \--> PSGI / Plack [works with all the above]

I've used Perl off and on since 97. If that were similar to him how would you display it in the text chart? And it's not meant to be a snarky reply.

I explained what I thought the OP was here:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1749696

I interpreted the OP as trying to portray the progression of the "popular framework." I mean, the original Ask HN question was about what they see a lot of people choosing. I didn't like how this chart was portraying it as Ruby vs. Python.

My point is that it used to be PHP, Perl or Java and I think a lot of Java people have moved into Ruby, Python, Scala, etc... Meanwhile, there are still tons of people using PHP (unlike the OP's portrayal that that has stopped somehow). The question marks is to indicate that I don't know what's happened with Perl. I don't know if people still use it for web programming or not.

I totally get how it could be hard to read. What is interesting is that it got voted up until you called it nonsensical and then it got voted down to 1 again. That means some people got it and agreed and some people didn't (which is totally understandable).

I think yours confused people because you left out the box of hammers. It's important for clarity.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com