On Sun, Dec 4, 2011 at 9:46 AM, Natarajan V <raja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > From a hiring perspective, am not sure why people are obsessed with > the mastery over the syntax of the languages. This also creates a > problem, when you frame a question that is applicable for PERL and not > very applicable for Java. We have to understand that programmers are > not a single breed. Everyone specializes/has interests in particular > areas.You can't compare a OS programmer, with a Game developer, with > an enterprise application developer, with a mashup developer (What is > a Mash up?). Am sure the Mashup developer would have the least clue of > what it takes to sort objects in Java/ Perl. > Agreed to every thing you say. Not sure where I gave you the impression that perl, as a common ground for measuring language skills, is a good filter. Measuring one's language skills is of use only for gauging if the candidate might be useful to fulfill, also, the short term needs (which, usually, is to maintain/extend/fix an already developed solution). Measuring based on language skills is of only a cosmetic use from the point of view of hiring a long-term asset for a company. I didn't mean to say perl is "syntactically tough" or somesuch and hence its a good tool for interviews. Nope. I only meant to say this: Perl (or C, for that matter) doesn't lay out things on a plate. Perl requires understanding of core OS concepts before one can build real world applications for use in a production environment. PHP, Java, etc., OTOH, makes it infinitely easy for anybody to program and build seemingly real world applications, allowing all sorts of people to write all sorts of things and still get away with it. In Java, it is the VM that externalizes problems, as though, it is someone else's to handle. I meant to say, thus, if you come across a perl programmer who has built real world applications, chances are their fundamentals will be strong (which, of course, you'd be testing in the interview). Their fundamentals are strong because the language forced them to rethink their approach at every juncture of their own skill development. That said, likewise, one also comes across a whole bunch of "perl scripting" people who have not written anything more than 300 lines of relevant code... but then, again, it is very easy to spot them. > IMHO, the problem isn't with Java/Perl, its a problem with your > question paper / interview panel. As I said earlier, a language is > independent of analytical skills. Why not frame your questions in such > a way that they don't have to write programs, but provide you with > algorithms instead? > Absolutely agree. But tell me, from your experience, do you have a perfect interview panel who all ask relevant, core testing questions? :) -Suraj -- Career Gear - Industry Driven Talent Factory _______________________________________________ ILUGC Mailing List: http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc