Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Number of Jobs by Programming Language

Posted by timothy on from the algol-is-not-listed dept.

The Viking writes "I was curious about which programming languages are hot with employers, so I did an informal search of several job search engines. The results are interesting (to me, at least). Are these numbers relevant? We can certainly debate whether or not the online job search engines are representative of the actual employment landscape."

4 of 590 comments (clear)

  1. Re:PHP??? by bryanthompson · · Score: 0, Troll

    no way is php the 'defacto' in developing new websites. I'd like to know where you got this idea...
    Surely ASP and ColdFusion destroy PHP in developing new websites. At least - the websites that matter.

  2. Anyone tired of criticism of the editors? by unterderbrucke · · Score: 0, Troll


    "from the algol-is-not-listed dept."

    I DEMAND that this "timothy" character is fired! I, "timothy", am a Algol programmer, and due to this insensitive comment by you, my company decided to fire me since I'm worthless!

  3. Re:PHP??? My Ass. by mgkimsal2 · · Score: 2, Troll

    Now to me that is putting the cart before the horse. First you choose what software you want to run, then you choose the platform you run it on.

    They've already got a cart AND horse and it's been moving along for years.

    Yeah, Java could handle what they need as well, theoretically. In the real world, they already have *thousands* of machines running FreeBSD. Scrapping all of those to move to new hardware and OS just to THEN be able to port everything to Java is extremely costly, both hardware-wise and time-wise. The cost differential must not have been enough to counteract whatever supposed deficincies some people think PHP may have.

    If they're really serious about Java, then can migrate things to PHP, then move those processes over to other platforms (on which Java will perform better) then migrate things to Java. Even if that go that route for some sections, it'll be years before it's complete.

    So, Java is great in theory but when push comes to shove, PHP is the one which is getting the job done.

    --
    creation science book
  4. Re:Java & ASP by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1, Troll


    >Java code is harder to port to .NET than VB- not
    >because Java is conceptually further away
    >from .NET than VB is (it definitely is not) but
    >because it comes from a different vendor (Sun)

    Ever heard of J# ? Java 1.1 on .NET that is; by Microsoft.

    Sure. In fact I just got my J# CD in the mail from MS a few weeks ago (they didn't have it ready in time for the Visual Studio .NET release). It doesn't implement the Java 2.0 class libraries. J# only implements the API in JDK 1.1.4, because that's the version of Java for which they have a license from Sun. Most Java code by now is using stuff that wasn't in 1.1.4. Therefore Java is difficult to port to J#, and that's ultimately because Java is from a different vendor.

    VB and VB.net don't have this problem, because VB.net presumably has all the features of VB that are compatible with .NET, and both are under the control of MS. So the VB.net conversion is relatively easy for Microsoft to successfully automate.

    Stupid thing to declare things out loud without research; that's not a nerd.

    Feh, such talk is cheap when it's coming from an AC. :)