Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Only 32% of Java developers really know Java

Posted by Hemos on from the but-does-it-mattter dept.

prostoalex writes "Research firm Gartner draws attention to the fact that less than a third of people who put Java on their resume actually know their stuff. The knowledge gap between someone who can successfully write a System.out.println() and someone capable of designing and implementing a complex Java system brings to companies being back-logged with pending projects."

60 of 220 comments (clear)

  1. How shocking... by davegaramond · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How shocking this news is to me, because it confirmed a survey report I just read yesterday: that 68,015% people lie in their resumes!

  2. They all know Java by davegaramond · · Score: 4, Funny

    Actually, the report is wrong. They just don't read the resumes carefully. The other 68% actually know *Javanese* Java, not Sun Java.

  3. Only 0% of editors proofread their articles. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "The knowledge gap between someone who can successfully write a System.out.println() and someone capable of designing and implementing a complex Java system brings to companies being back-logged with pending projects."

    We also would have accepted: Only 26% of submitters to Slashdot can create proper sentences.

    1. Re:Only 0% of editors proofread their articles. by saden1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Was I the only one that got the feeling that they were trying to sell me OptimalJ? Although I agree with the lack of "skilled" Java develoeprs I really can't their numbers seriously as they are quite lacking in the credibility department.

      --

      -----
      One is born into aristocracy, but mediocrity can only be achieved through hard work.
    2. Re:Only 0% of editors proofread their articles. by mrlpz · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree, I have stopped taking the Gartner group seriously because too many of their reports in the past are highly skewed, and wreak of funding from some party interested in the "findings" leaning in their favor.

      And as for the sales pitch, you could almost tell it was coming from the moment they brought up Compuware.

  4. In other news... by sepluv · · Score: 4, Funny
    Researchers suggest that "less than a third of people who put something on their resume know anything about it". News at 11...

    Also "99% of researchers and statisticians have no idea what they are talking about and don't know what research means"

    --
    Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
    [This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
  5. Sad but true (in my case, at least) by FricassedMonkey · · Score: 3, Informative

    It really is sad.. I've been dealing with Java for years, and I know that I couldn't bring myself to bother messing with a 'complex' project... Of course, I'm not going to be putting 'Java' on my resume anytime soon, either...

  6. Not at all suprised by smari · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Java was the popular thing of it's time. If you didn't know it at the apogee of the internet bubble, you didn't get a job in the computer idustry; it's a lot easier to say that you know it, and hope that you never have to use it. I for one hope that I don't have to write Java code again...

    Now things are pointing similarly towards C# and .NET - buzzwords rule the market from the big business' point of view.

    However, those who really know their stuff normally stick to the older languages... hype is good in some ways, but in the grand scheme of things, it's the older, better stuff that will prevail.

    1. Re:Not at all suprised by krymsin01 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So true, that's why most people walk where they want to go, actually write letters, and live only off what the land provides for them.

      --
      stuff
    2. Re:Not at all suprised by pfraser · · Score: 3, Funny

      hype is good in some ways, but in the grand scheme of things, it's the older, better stuff that will prevail.

      Yes, just like MS-DOS has prevailed...

    3. Re:Not at all suprised by 4of12 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      those who really know their stuff

      More than buzzword compliant resumes, I've been more interested in people who could show me nice looking code and explain it intelligently to an audience that includes people with varying levels of expertise.

      I figure that anyone sharp enough to have picked up one language and set of libraries and used it well can just as well do it again.

      That said, I can see the temptation to use stupid HR tactics to try to screen out smokeblowers. Problem is that it's difficult to devise a system that simple, where a non-expert in HR can turn a crank and cull the dolts from the field with perfect accuracy (it's like defending against spam). You're likely to let posers through the gates (false positives) and cull out an occassional gem that looks unpolished (false negative).

      There's a good reason people resort to informal social networks for recruiting (that is, asking around if anyone knows anyone that's good and looking for a new position) - it's because the crank turning procedures are so unsatisfying.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    4. Re:Not at all suprised by AJWM · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I figure that anyone sharp enough to have picked up one language and set of libraries and used it well can just as well do it again.

      Close but not quite. You're as likely to find that they end up using whatever new language you throw at them as if it were some weird dialect of the only one they know well.

      My rule of thumb if I'm looking for someone that needs to be able to pick up a new language is to find someone that knows at least three different ones (and I wouldn't count C++, Java and C# as three -- one and a half, maybe), or two if they're different enough.

      My first two computer languages were Algol and APL, I've since been paid to write programs in about a dozen other languages and written toy programs in another ten or so. Heck, except for short term contract jobs, I've often ended up developing software in some language other than the one I was originally hired for.

      It's tough being on the hiring end too -- if I've got project deadlines looming and I'm given a foot-high stack of resumes to look through to pick out a few candidates to interview, I'm sorry but my first pass through the stack is to going to be to find any reason at all to not look at a given resume any further, so I can shrink the pile that I actually have to read and think about. I may end up throwing out a gem but as long as there's still one left in the pile I look at, that doesn't matter. (Well, not to me, I know it matters to the one I threw out.)

      Yeah, the whole resume/HR/interview process sucks, and it's one of the least efficient ways to find a job (or a good candidate), but alas most tech types are even worse at social networking, at least with the kind of people one needs to to get the job.

      --
      -- Alastair
    5. Re:Not at all suprised by AJWM · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've seen some people do a skills matrix -- list each language (or other computer related skill, like system administration or particular packages) and give a level of experience for each, sometimes also with a "last used" date.

      I used to categorize them in groups, something like:
      Highly skilled in: C, C++, Java
      Experience in: Python, PL/SQL
      Some exposure to: Ruby, Coral 66, BF

      If I'd just done a couple of classes, it'd be in the "some exposure to" category. Anything less I wouldn't bother mentioning. (Hey, I've done the equivalent of "hello world" in a lot of obscure languages, and (like a lot of programmers) I can read more than I can write code in.)

      These days I have enough trouble cramming my resume into just three pages, so I don't bother listing anything I'm not prepared (by both knowledge and inclination) to immediately sit down and start coding in. If there's some other language that might also be relevant to the job, I'll mention it in the cover letter. And there's stuff I leave out -- I've been an APL resident expert, even taught courses in it, but I don't mention it on my resume because (a) I'm very rusty and (b) I have no particular desire to do develop in APL again (and I guess (c), there's no demand for it). Now, if someone were looking to convert an APL application to Java, say, I might be interested.

      (And on one job, despite never having claimed any knowledge of COBOL and even actively denying any knowledge of it, the boss stuck me with extending a COBOL application, over my protests, saying "it's easy, you'll pick it up". (Fortunately I managed to put it right back down again after that project ;-)

      --
      -- Alastair
    6. Re:Not at all suprised by JanneM · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Hm. Ok, this kind of "statistics" is of course just fo fun, and have very little relevance. That said:

      "java" - 60 million hits

      but

      "java -coffee -island" - 9.3 million hits

      Still quite a lot, but not as huge as the first search made it out to be.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    7. Re:Not at all suprised by repetty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Java was the popular thing of it's time."

      I'm unemployeed so I spend A LOT of time looking at job listings.

      In Austin, Texas, at least, it is STILL Java's time. Maybe things are different in Iceland.

      --Richard

    8. Re:Not at all suprised by AJWM · · Score: 2, Funny

      Heh!

      Those were, of course, merely examples. The closest I've come to Brainfsck is reading stuff on the web, and somewhere around I think I have the Coral66 reference.

      Then there's the guy I worked with who should have put "Team Lead" on his resume. Pronounced "led", as in sinker or dead weight...

      --
      -- Alastair
  7. Well, I'm relieved... by Green+Light · · Score: 4, Funny

    I see that I'm not the only one!

    --
    "Send an Instant Karma to me" - Yes
  8. It's True. by dmorin · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I am the first line interviewer at my company. I ask Java programming questions that I consider easy (like tricking people into trying to store a primitive in a collections object, or knowing how to determine if a bit is set). Sad to say most people fail. Some fail spectacularly.

    For the record I do NOT ask those boring certification style questions that you'd only know the answer to by memorizing the spec. All the questions we ask start with "here's a problem, now solve it with real Java code, please." If I've learned one thing, it's if somebody groans and complains that writing code is so trivial you shouldn't even ask it, then sit there and force them to write code because chances are they can't.

    --
    www.HearMySoulSpeak.com
    1. Re:It's True. by GypC · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The real skill is recognizing and choosing the best ways to solve problems with a computer in a given paradigm (OO, Functional, etc). Languages are easy to pick up, and almost all programmers (except maybe C) have a manual on their desk.

      Memorizing the nitpicky details or anything more than basic syntax is worthless. I'm sure Dr. Knuth would fail your little test. He wouldn't bother memorizing stuff that is easy to look up.

      I managed to get a job doing BASIC programming with little knowledge of BASIC. I knew C, C++, PASCAL, Perl, Python, and sh. It took me maybe 2-3 days to become comfortable with BASIC. Now I'm one of the best programmers they've ever had, and I'm cleaning up a lot of their old crap code written by people who sure knew BASIC, but couldn't design a readable program to save their own lives. I'm talking GOTOs every other line.

      Every good programmer with a background in OO languages worth hiring would be able to pick up Java in a very short time. You're probably weeding out a lot of real talent.

      Now go back to pretending you're a real programmer and getting your jollies mocking people who can't write a bunch of Java code off the tops of their heads without a manual to look at, yet dare to apply for a developer postition!

    2. Re:It's True. by Jmstuckman · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Now, I'm assuming that the original poster was giving this test to people who put Java on their resume. (Otherwise, why bother?) The first example he gave (testing a bit) could be done with simple boolean operators that are the same in many other languages. (there might be a better way but this is one...) The second problem (boxing/unboxing) is something that any Java developer with experience should be able to do in their sleep, because it is a VERY common operation.

      If I'm appling for a C++ development job and I put C++ on my resume, isn't it fair to ask me to, say, write a simple class definition without looking up the syntax? If I can't do it, then I must not have programmed in the language much at all, and I have no business putting C++ on my resume. In theory, the resume's supposed to be for languages you know, not languages that you could learn.

    3. Re:It's True. by humblecoder · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I have been on both sides of the interviewing table, and in my experience, the best technical interviews are language-agnostic, regardless of what language is used in your shop. All of the questions that I ask start with "here's a programming problem, now solve it in whatever language you want". I am more interested in seeing a person's thought process as they go through the steps of solving the problem than their syntactic recall for a particular language.

      My rationale is that a software developer who has excellent problem solving skills can transfer their skills to any language. However, someone who knows the syntax and tricks of a language cold may or may not be a good problem solver.

      The only exception to this is that if I want someone with OO skills, I will ask language-agnostic questions about OO design and development concepts (ex: define polymorphism, state why it is useful, and give an example of how it can be used).

      Also, a question that "tricks people into trying to store a primitive in a collections object", doesn't seem like a very useful question. First, you are testing for knowledge of a Java syntactic quirk. Secondly, even if a person didn't know about this quirk right off the bat, any developer worth their salt certainly would figure it out the first time they tried to compile the progam.

      In fairness, I do like the question about determining if a bit is set, although I wouldn't hold it against the person if they didn't have the Java bit operators memorized. As long as they understood the CONCEPT of bit manipulation, I'd be happy.

      --

      ------

      www.moneybythenumbers.com

    4. Re:It's True. by iabervon · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can store a primitive in a collections object in Java 1.5; haven't you read JSR 201? (Well, okay, it actually automatically boxes them for you, and you have to declare it as "Collection" instead of "Collection", but the compiler error message is reasonably informative, and it's trivially caught at compile time.

      I'm personally more worried about people who claim to know Java, but think that it is a good idea to keep pools of objects and reuse them. Aside from all of the programming hassles this creates for anyone trying to use the stuff, it messes up the garbage collector, which can't optimize dealing with objects that live forever and reference a ton of unrelated short-lived stuff over time. The problem is not the people who can't actually write any Java; the problem is the people who can write Java, but just make things slower and harder to maintain.

    5. Re:It's True. by troon · · Score: 2, Funny

      All of the questions that I ask start with "here's a programming problem, now solve it in whatever language you want".

      OK, I choose Whitespace as my language of choice. My solution is on the other side of the page...

      --
      Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
  9. It's worse than this by dhk42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    My real world experience tells me it is much less than 32%. 15% at best (though another 15% THINK they know java - this is where the real danger lies).

    If you require knowledge of complex topics like sensible J2EE architecture or multi-threading it falls into the single digits.

    The second half of the article recommends Model Driven Architecture for the masses as the solution. This amounts to putting complex tools into the hands of idiots. Tools that go out of their way to keep people ignorant, while simultaneously giving them the power to commit their sins on a grand scale. Brilliant.

    dhk

  10. Only 2% of English speakers know English. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2, Funny


    "Only 32% of Java developers really know Java."

    An old Digital Equipment Company manual for technical writers said that only a small percentage of people really know English. And here is an example of not knowing English, in the Slashdot story:

    "The knowledge gap between someone who can successfully write a System.out.println() and someone capable of designing and implementing a complex Java system brings to companies being back-logged with pending projects."

  11. 32% are any good? by bluGill · · Score: 5, Informative

    Knowing Java is very different from knowing programming. If you can't do a complex project in Java you can't do a complex project in any language. If you can do it in any language, you can do it in Java. The first step might be learning Java, but any good programmer can handle that in a short time. Now granted I'd want someone who knows all the tricks on the team so I don't re-implement the wheel, but a complex project by definition requires many people so that isn't an issue.

    HR is far too hung up on what you have already done, not realizing that the data structures and algorithms are what counts, and they are the same in any language.

    1. Re:32% are any good? by peterdaly · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I agree with your statements if a distinction is added between procedural and object oriented languages.

      I have seen too many "old school" developers who havn't the foggiest idea about OO who think they can code in Java because they know the syntax.

      All languages are not equal.

      --
      Soccer Goal Plans
    2. Re:32% are any good? by Haeleth · · Score: 4, Informative

      I am a C coder by trade... I like functional programming because its what I do 5 days a week eight hours a day

      Um, if you're a C coder, then you are not doing functional programming, you are doing procedural programming. Functional programming means languages like Lisp, ML, and Haskell.

  12. Code-completion interviewer by Latent+Heat · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I am of the mind that asking technical questions are fair interview questions -- I mean what are you supposed to ask in an interview for a technical job?

    On the other hand, most of us mortals don't store all the details of API's in our heads. Back in the Stone Age we used manuals and in the Information Age we use the SUN Web site. If your interview objective is to see how someone would get the information to solve the problem, that is fine, but if your objective is to see if that person already has some narrow set of information, you are going to exclude some capable people.

    I am mainly a Delphi developer (I should say a Delphi component developer), and my Java experience is only 4 months old, and gee, my Java experience is limited to using JNI to allow a Delphi ActiveX component to invoke an extension module written in Java and using a class loader so that extension module can be reloaded while the ActiveX component is still running.

    I don't know the answer to your question about Java collection objects without looking it up, although I have enough sense to know that you have to use Object wrappers for value types in collections and then have to cast those objects back to their original types when you pull Object references out of collections -- I know that from "wasting" time reading Slashdot.

    I guess I would fail your interview.

    1. Re:Code-completion interviewer by sahala · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The hardest thing to do in this business is understand the problem and come up with a solution that is maintainable, easy to code and scalable. If I want to know how to solve a specific algorithm like that, I'll google.

      I don't consider myself a Java developer (I design/build UIs) but I would be pretty dismayed if I saw a self-proclaimed Java developer resort to looking up that "algorithm" on google. Granted, the parent post's wording is a little ambiguous but that shouldn't stop an interviewee from asking a few clarifying questions, then writing out half-decent code that avoids a few blatant obstacles, in this case the requirement for Collections to store primitives. The parent is really referring to candidates not being able to live up to their own talk, which I think is a valid statement. If someone groans about writing a snippet of code in an interview, wouldn't that make him look like a crappy potential co-worker who groans about writing code for production?

    2. Re:Code-completion interviewer by C10H14N2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had an interview recently where they were looking for someone who "knew" VB, a VERY obscure piece of middleware that runs both VB and Java, and Websphere. Ok, got all of the above. However, my working Java experience is limited to J2EE, you know, the sort of Java that's relevant to the aforementioned systems. The interviewer look utterly blank when I explained that, even though his job description did not explicitly say anything about Java that it was necessarily implied and that, yes, I have J2EE experience but not Swing/AWT GUI design, so please fortheloveofgod, make sure the Java you don't know you are asking for does not involve blasted Java GUIs. Sure, I *could* do it, but I've NEVER needed to and I don't want to. Ever. I hate AWT and Swing. Blech. Conversely, I know quite a few people who "know" Java in the sense of building pretty applications in Swing. God bless them, but they don't know the first thing about J2EE. Unfortunately, HR types wrap the whole thing up in "knows Java." That's as useful as "Knows C." Ok, now somewhere between "can write 'hello world'" and "can write nuclear power safety systems" we must find a usable definition of "knows," because if all you need is someone to write accounting functions and you've got a nuclear engineer across the desk, or vice versa, even "has the entire API committed to memory" is not a sufficient yardstick to work with.

    3. Re:Code-completion interviewer by haystor · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You probably wouldn't fail his interview. Even when a person gets a question wrong, you can tell if they know the language or now.

      Interviewing should be an interactive process. If you try to store primitives in a Collection the interviewer should say that Collections only store Objects. A java programmer will respond, "oh yea, that's right" and throw in a few wrappers. Someone that just put java on their resume will still be lost.

      At least that's been my experience. I look for comfort level with the material. Experienced programmers can miss easy questions, particularly because they have developed methods for avoiding those very questions. For instance, I may occasionally not be completely sure of order of operations, so I just slap on some extra parentheses or split a large equation up over more than one line.

      --
      t
  13. And the coding style is even worse by peterdaly · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And just because they may know the syntax, that does not mean they can write code worth a crap. I took over a project where a guy wrote his own xml parser while there were tons of free ones on the market. That was a disgusting mess the ended up being easier to convert to real parser rather than fix some parsing problems. He also used count to 1 billion loops when spawning external processes because he didn't know about waitFor(). At first we could not figure out why his code was so slow. Add on top this was all done in static void main, which no other methods or calls.

    He has moved on to writing web application in RPG for another department, where every new group of pages gets deployed on a new port...they seem lost on the whole url concept

    Knowing Java is like knowing English (or any language.) Just because you know the language does not mean you are any good at writing poetry.

    --
    Soccer Goal Plans
  14. This article is just an advertisement... by tcopeland · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...for Compuware's software. For example, from the article:

    "Highly skilled and experienced Java developers are quick to recognise the value of MDA..."

    where "MDA" is Compuware's acronym for "buy our software and generate all your code". And since "highly skilled developers recognise the value", anyone who doesn't "recognise the value" and buy their product is an unskilled dolt.
    --
    The Army reading list
  15. Resume by illuminatedwax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This brings up the point:
    What do you have to know to put a computer language on your resume? Let's say that I put "Java" on my list. Am I expected to, say, know all of the built-in functions for a vector, or string, during my interview? If I put Python down on my resume, am I expected to know the names of built-in function overloaders for classes or the functions and parameters for the re module?

    Basically what I'm asking is, if I put a computer language down on my resume, should I be expected to code something at an interview immediately without looking at any references? This doesn't seem unreasonable, if the program were simple, but I could imagine employers asking for more complex things. How complex is too complex and how much specific information should a computer programmer retain about a certain language, say, after not using it for 3 years (he was doing VBScript just until he could pay off his debt, I swear)?

    I think it's more important to know "how to program" rather than "how to program in X" because the skills you learn in one language are usually easily transferrable to another, as long as you have lots of experience in different kinds of languages: functional, procedural, OO, assembly language, etc.

    As a side-note, it looks in the article like by saying that 68% of employees don't understand Java, he really means that 68% of employees have never heard of MDA and have no idea what the hell it is, or don't quickly "recognise the value of MDA," since, of course, all highly-skilled Java programmers do.

    --Stephen

    --
    Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    1. Re:Resume by metamatic · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've been writing code for (thinks) over 20 years now, and whatever the language I always need to make extensive reference to documentation for simple things like names of API calls and order of arguments. For instance, in spite of writing C for over 20 years, I still need to refer to the man pages to check the parameters for fopen. Any employer who expected me to write code at an interview and get the syntax correct would be in for a big disappointment.

      So I have a big problem with syntax. That's why I like Scheme and hate C++. To me, syntax seems like a silly arbitrary distraction. I wish more languages took the Smalltalk approach to function arguments, too.

      I'd have no problem with questions about architecture, abstraction, the development process and design trade-offs though.

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  16. Whooha! Gartner is right this time! by KamuSan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is exactly my experience. I've been developing in Java for about 8 years and I think I met just 10 other people who really know their Java. And of those 10 people just about 2 or 3 are able to design an enterprise class application.

    It's not just Java developers, in the booming years a lot of people were hired by IT consulting firms here (NL) that shouldn't be near any computer at all. I've seen system engineers who studied politicology and got an MCSE who don't know the most basic thing about Windows and are not able to solve any problem at all. I've met tens of 'project managers' who don't know anything about IT and even less about software development and are too stubborn to listen to people who do know their shit.

    The worst of all are VB 'programmers' who are just able to point and click a basic application, but don't have any feeling for what a programmer should be able to do.

    The worst is title inflation. Every donkey is a 'software engineer' these days, and if you are able to actually design a piece of software you should call yourself 'architect', otherwise people won't take you seriously.
    Because 'programmers' are seen as monkeys that type and are doing a trick that every other monkey can do. :-(

    1. Re:Whooha! Gartner is right this time! by tjmsquared · · Score: 2, Funny

      The worst of all are VB 'programmers' The worst is title inflation So, the absolute worst is a VB Programmer who calls himself a Software Architect?

    2. Re:Whooha! Gartner is right this time! by hsoft · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The VB thing is absolutely right. And I was *lucky* enough to have this type of guy as my project manager. He first started the project with Delphi (which rules, as everybody know), and when I was hired there, I started talking about refactoring the whole thing after 3 months (Trust me, the project really needed (and still needs, since that refactoring has never been done ) it.), and this guy said: "I think we should rewrite the whole thing in VB".

      I then knew that I needed to work under another project manager. I had to argue a lot before he finally gave up about VB. Darnit, this guy programmed 8 years with delphi, and has absolutely no clue about what OOP is (He knows that he must add code in the OnClick events).

      I don't call these guys "programmers", I call them "barely-over-the-average users how can effectively point-and-click-and-sometimes-even-type-stuff". Hopefully, a lot of these guys are laid off because of the india outsourcing.

      There was a great comment about VB on ask.slashdot.

      --
      perception is reality
  17. Imagine the statistics for C++ by metamatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The studies I'm familiar with showed that it took 5 years to become competent in C++, and that was before they added STL. So I suspect the statistics for the number of alleged C++ programmers who actually know the language would be even worse.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    1. Re:Imagine the statistics for C++ by Screaming+Lunatic · · Score: 3, Insightful
      The studies I'm familiar with showed that it took 5 years to become competent in C++, and that was before they added STL. So I suspect the statistics for the number of alleged C++ programmers who actually know the language would be even worse.

      I have been programming with C++ for 6 years now and I am competent with it and very productive. I would say 5 years is an overshoot if you're trying to gauge competence.

      I'm not sure what your definition of "knowing the language" is. If someone asked me to rate my C++ skills from 1 to 10, I would give myself a 4 or a 5. Anyone that rates themselves a 7 or higher is either named Sutter, Alexandrescu, Glassborow, or Stroustroup. Or is either grossly unfamiliar with the scope of C++ or flat out lying.

      Their were people that thought they new the language cold until Alexandrescu wrote Modern C++ Design and turned the C++ on end.

      I'm still trying to add policy-based design, template metaprogramming, and generics for more than just containers to my C++ arsenal.

      Give me 6 more years and I'll "know the language cold" until someone else writes a book on how to exploit a language feature of C++ in an absolutely different way.

      However, that is not a bad thing because C++ does not punish you for features that you don't know.

  18. Memorization vs Knowledge by Prien715 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't really know what it means to "know" java. The language's entire approach is to be an object zoo rather than using a few elegant commands to do most anything. Therefore, most of Java programming is looking things up in the docs. That my friend, is the most important skill.

    There's a few main types of programming styles: Object Oriented (Java), Functionally Oriented (C), Procedurally Oriented (LISP), and hybrids (C++, Perl). Once you learn how to think in the way required by each of these styles, all that's left is memorizing syntax and commands. And that's what man pages are for.

    --
    -- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
  19. Re:Why do people keep making excuses for Java? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2, Interesting


    It doesn't work well for an applet in a browser, and it doesn't work well for stand alone apps.

    Yes, and those are not the areas where Java has been very successful. However there are others, like server programming where Java is clearly the best choce.

    I think most Java programmers are like me, they played with it enough to find out it's not worth the trouble.

    I hope so. That will make it easier for those of us who actually understand Java and where it is appropriate to charge high hourly consulting rates.

  20. And just what does this say to the Interviewee? by mosel-saar-ruwer · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Basically I set up a situation where I want to create a hashmap of numeric counters such that I am going to increment a million times, but only store 100k keys into the table, and ask people to write me the structure to do it.

    I have [or have had] a fairly extensive knowledge of the J2EE Collections Framework, and I don't have a clue what that "sentence" is supposed to say. In fact, screw the "sentence"; let's concentrate on the clause create a hashmap of numeric counters such that I am going to increment a million times, but only store 100k keys into the table. What does this mean? "Numeric counters" of what? "Increment" what? "Keys" into whose "table" of what?

    If I were the interviewee, and my prospective boss couldn't explain himself any better than that, then I'd give some serious thought to alternatives such as bagging groceries, hanging drywall, or pushing a mop.

    PS: You can make upwards of $20/hr hanging drywall; of course, if you don't wear a mask, the dust might take its toll on your lungs, but hey, we're young and we're gonna live forever, right?

  21. Is it any worse... by fm6 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ...than employers demanding 5 years Java experience -- 2 or 3 years after the language was invented?

    But it is mind-boggling what people can get away with on their resumes. Knew a guy who claimed to have graduate degrees from schools whose names he couldn't spell. You'd think employers would spot that, but no -- he actually held a couple of director-level jobs at the height of the bubble.

    I really should get a little more creative with my resume. People who see it always ask why I don't mention where I got my 4-year degree. Answer: I don't have one. Which is a pain -- some companies won't even talk to me because of it. I could fudge up a degree from Whatsamatter U (double major, computer engineering and journalism). I'm sure nobody'd check. But I'm too much of a coward to pull off that kind of fib!

    Oops. Just had a thought. I know Java. My credentials are impeccable: I wrote the JDK release notes for almost a year, and I once played a video game with James Gosling! But I've never worked as a Java programmer, being absolutely the worst coder on the planet. But if the shortage of Java programmers is that bad, maybe that's not such a problem!

  22. "know Java" vs "programming java" is still legit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I list Java among my skills, even though I cannot write Java code worth a damn. And I'm not lying to the resume reader.

    I know what Java is, I know how to use the Java commandline to turn on Debugging, manage memory usage, turn off GC, etc. I know more about idiosyncracies in Java VM versions on 6 different platforms then most programmers.

    I never said I knew how to program Java.

  23. Re:Compuware by nickos · · Score: 2

    I'm a C/C++ coder who's just been roped (against my wishes) into a J2EE project that's using OptimalJ to save time. It seems to me that J2EE is totally over engineered and that something like OptimalJ is needed to make J2EE development competitive (developer time wise) with ASP or PHP. OptimalJ is woefuly inefficient in the Java code it creates, but is very powerful - you can make an entity relationship diagram, click a few buttons and you've got a fully working website ready for deployment. I can see all web development going this way soon...

  24. there is technology underneath it all by hak1du · · Score: 3, Insightful

    buzzwords rule the market from the big business' point of view.

    Java did represent an important step for industry beyond C++: it was the first widely accepted language with runtime safety, garbage collection, and reflection. Those aren't just buzzwords, they make a real difference.

    On the other hand, Java has failed to keep up: Sun's irrational insistence on insulating programmers from the underlying platform, their intellectual property claims and licensing strategy over Java, and their failure to evolve the language mean that Java has remained a poor choice for many applications.

    C# improves over Java in several of these areas: it is "just" a language (Microsoft actually doesn't seem to want you to use third party .NET implementations they don't control), it is an open standard, it has excellent facilities for interfacing efficiently with native code, and it addresses some serious limitations of the Java language. This is progress. However, even C# is still years behind the state of the art in programming language technologies.

    However, those who really know their stuff normally stick to the older languages... hype is good in some ways, but in the grand scheme of things, it's the older, better stuff that will prevail.

    You mean, older languages like Lisp, Modula-3, CLU, Smalltalk-80, Algol-68, Prolog, and Scheme?

    Or do you mean older languages like Visual Basic, C, and Fortran?

    There are good, well-designed older languages, and there are poorly designed older languages. Many people seem to stick with poorly designed older languages out of habit and because they don't know any better.

    If you are referring to C and C++, they are, in fact, relative newcomers as far as languages go, and they represent a significant step back over the languages that preceded them. And both C and C++ were enormously overhyped at their time.

  25. Troll? You must be joking... by Graelin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Java is a very strict OO language. You cannot get anything done in Java without a myrid of class extensions and "implementations." This has the great benefit of allowing lots of developers to work on very specific parts of a project and not run into eachother very often. This has the very negative effect of discouraging creativity in the individual programmers work since so much is set in stone.

    Most Java programmers end up as class monkeys, taking very specific directions from a select few who determined the entire arcitecture of the system. This is not programming as an art. This is monkey work. Put them in a position where they need to use Java (or any language) to solve a real problem and they will fail.

    Java has had the misfortune of a gigantic hype machine pushing it. Because it could not live up to the hype in some areas a lot of people have dismissed it. This is probably less Java's fault and more the fault of those who consider it "dead." For they should look at the language and realize where it's strengths are.

    Java in the browser - DOA. It sucked. Still sucks. And nobody uses it anymore (or nobody SHOULD...)

    Java as an App - So it turns out that the whole "corss-platform" thing was a joke. Multiple JVMs across multiple OSes made for far too many variables. Write-once, run-anywhere it most certainly is not. And these days you have multiple GUI implementations and their VM/OS-specific quirks.

    Java on the Server - Ok, this has a future. Cross platform doesn't matter. Speed isn't an issue nearly as much. And there are a slew of components already available (J2EE) that do the hard part for you. ...Yes, that was two rants in one. It's twofor day here on /.

  26. Was this an article... by azuroff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... or an advertisement for OptimalJ?

    This has resulted in a tremendous backlog of projects," says Aad Van Schetsen, Compuware sales director for application development and integration solutions in the Europe, Middle East, Africa region.

    Ben van Niekerk, Compuware SA product manager, says locally the backlog is mainly in projects to integrate new applications into Java legacy code.

    Van Schetsen says the key to the success of tools such as Compuware's OptimalJ is their use of a model-driven architecture

    Tools like OptimalJ ensure best practices and standards as well as enable companies to leverage the core capabilities of their developers by allowing them to focus on applications and not the underlying technologies.

    "Although we are still in the education phase, particularly with less experienced Java developers and development companies, momentum is gradually growing with OptimalJ sales increasing threefold in the past financial year."

    1. Re:Was this an article... by jjct1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think there are some people who say they know Java but are not that skilled, but I think 32% is way low. Maybe 65 to 70% of developers really know Java. This is just marketing fluff to try and sell a tool based on MDA which isn't going anywhere fast.

  27. And... by Ieshan · · Score: 2, Funny

    78% of all statistics are made up. //smirk

  28. Re:I dont get Java like too many techies by shibbie · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You seem to be a very much "old school" programmer whereby you don't adapt to new tech. This isn't a bad thing, especially if what you know works well but how long do you think you can afford to not learn new skills like Java? The OO programming paradigm is an evolution of programming languages designed to make it easier to replace parts of code that need changing (new GUI, database code etc) and aid ease of reading and understanding. OO should be used everywhere imho as its good programming practice. On a final note, you don't want ONE developer knowing a huge project. What happens if that developer dies? It will take a new dev ages to learn all of that code, not only that but what if that one developer is actually somebody who writes poor code? I'd rather fix a few objects than rewrite an entire system. P.S. Java is no longer slow, its evolved a lot since 1.1 days. After a few minutes on a server it can actually run faster than native code due to the VM containing a runtime optimizing compiler.

  29. Re:Because OO design is a fricken MESS by SlowMovingTarget · · Score: 2, Informative

    You're correct, of course. The principles should be simple. They should be fairly compact, and like all principles, they should come from the well of experience. The principles for good OO design are fairly simple:

    Don't Repeat Yourself: knowledge should be represented only once in the system.

    Tell, don't ask.

    Classify objects in your systems by the messages they respond to, and the responsibilities they hold.

    An object should only call features of: a: an object passed into it as an argument, b: an object it creates, or c: itself (I think this is the correct form of the "Law of Demeter")

    Prefer short methods.

    Apply design patterns according to the problems they are intended to solve.

    When using design patterns, find the pattern that sets the context, this will help you identify other companion patterns that typically apply to the problem (or related problems).

    Design your code to be tested, or better, write test code to help flush out the design.

    Keep a nostril open for code smells, use refactorings and tests to fix the problem.

    ...

    Always remember these are principles and not rules.

    Now explaining those principles with code and narrative will fill up 700 pages if you give the whole history of how they came to be. Or you can just visit the pragmatic programmers' web site and read a bit less than 700 pages.

    I also agree that the typical notion of encapsulation doesn't necessarily protect the data. When most people think of encapsulating they think of putting a barrier of functions between a data consumer and the provider (I was revolted when I first saw this in Java, I think C# and Delphi do this better with the first class notion of property). But the other meaning for encapsulation is "to embody" the data. I think that ends up being a more powerful concept when properly applied than publishing getters and setters for attirbutes that might as well be public. The idea that some other object must consume (get) the data is the first warning sign that the design is deviating from the OO way of thinking (OK, OK, paradigm, there I typed it again). When an object embodies the data, encapsulation can, in fact, protect it. But I was actually thinking that polymorphism provides a better way to ensure consistent handling of data in an OO system.

    Ironically, MDA is closer to your concept of TOP than OOP is, as MDA is metadata-intensive and oriented to the creation of purpose-built syntaxes (modeling languages), although it is not specific to relational database access.

    You might find this flabergasting, but I'm tempted to believe that relational databases aren't all that necessary any more. Most modern relational database hold nearly all of their data in memory. That's the only way they can achieve the performance they do. Take Oracle databases for example. In my shop the Oracle instances we run typically hold 98% of their data in memory (we have big Solaris boxen). So why not use some sort of memory snapshot system like Prevayler? The answer, of course, is that too many developers find this scary. The other argument against this is 'reporting tools.'

    No, I'm not suggesting we all throw out our relational databases. But I do think there is life beyond relational data.

    Also, I didn't build an example of a bad procedural system for this post. I apologize. As you know, that takes a lot of effort. Instead, as a consolation, have a look here: http://www.nakedobjects.org/section6.html Their discussion is actually about the pitfalls of task-oriented UI design, but their arguments apply to this discussion. Task-oriented UI design typically goes hand-in-hand with transaction script architecture and falls prey to the same issues (I'll even add an 'IMHO' to that). I think you'll like their spaghetti diagram a bit of the way down the page.

    Thanks for the response, and the discussion.

    Michael Murphree

  30. This is nothing new... by tsvk · · Score: 4, Funny

    As long as there are people putting "I know CHMOD and Upload/Download" on their resumes, I guess anything is possible....

  31. 'Knowing' Java by cavalierlwt · · Score: 2, Interesting

    At what point does a person *know* java? I graduated a few years ago, and I listed Java on my resume. I had taken two semesters (Introduction and Client/Server) and felt like I should list it. I would venture a guess that no project done for a class rivals the complexity of a real world project, but are college students supposed to leave their resumes blank? Naturally I didn't list Java under the experienced listings,but under languages known. Maybe there should be industry standardized tests for each language, not unlike A+ certifications or Redhat Linux Certifications.

  32. Why just JAVA? by vatsal · · Score: 3, Insightful

    #) Isn't this true for every langauage....

    #) Building complex systems requires experience(on large projects and exp in a particular domain),no matter which language you are using....

    #) One good way to identify someone's love for a langauge or platform is to check for his participation and contribution to FLOSS. that loves ensures his personal interest and can be a pointer to the fact S/he is inquizitive and likes exploring more (not just learning the basic sytax required to do the job).

    --
    Linux: Self-mutilation is a snap.Be a geek!!!
  33. It's like this... by BiggerIsBetter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Remember the Matrix, when Keanu says "I know Kung Fu"? It's like that, only with Java. It doesn't mean you can puddle your way through a toy app, it means you make the language your bitch. It does what you want, when you want it, how you want it. Maybe you don't remember all the classes and their methods, but you know the common ones, and you can find the rest from the API in a flash.

    --
    Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
  34. This is an advertorial by richard_za · · Score: 2, Informative

    This article is an advertorial, I am in the development industry in south africa and itweb.co.za is often used to dispense stuff like this. In fact some software products I have written myself were paid for and featured on itweb.

  35. Death of Java by randall_burns · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Java from the start was _way_ overhyped IMHO. The big thing that Java was supposed to do early on:
    provide a development platform by which developers could do applications applications that would run either on the client or the server. The big problem is that Java never really delivered on the client end. Applets run, but they are so poorly engineered, in the words of Marc Andreeson "client side java is dead'--and Javascript has take much of the role it was anticipated that Java would take on the client.


    I previous poster made legitimate points that Java brought garbage collection, reflection and runtime safety into the popular eye. However, there are other widely used, well-standardized languages with those same features, namely Javascript.


    C# may be better in key respects than Java, but I have trouble conceiving of C# as a really open standard. The ECMA standard for Javascript is already supported by a variety of companies(i.e. IBM, Lotus, Microsoft, AOL/Time/Warner/Netscape) in a variety of products.


    The folks at have shown that they can extend Javascript quite a bit-even in browser implementations.For all of the talk of C#, one thing that is interesting about .Net IMHO is the they've provided an interesting platform for server side Javascript. If mono takes off at all on Linux, I'd expect we'd see a growth in the server-side Javascript community and the promised that were made for Java early on would start to be delivered through a different language.


    I'm a DBA and Perl/Python programmer. I've used Java for class projects at CMU. Java and C# both strike me as overly complicate for most of the work I do on a day by day basis. Javscript isn't there yet-but I can see that it might get there. There is a real niche for a well standardized, universally available scripting language that just hasn't been filled yet. If a small fraction of the engineering effort applied to Java were applied in this direction, I'd expect big benefits.