Only 32% of Java developers really know Java

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."

Comments

Only 0% of editors proofread their articles.

[Anonymous Coward]

"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.

Not at all suprised

[smari]

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.

It's True.

[dmorin]

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.

Re:It's True.

[GypC]

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!

Re:It's True.

[Jmstuckman]

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.

32% are any good?

[bluGill]

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.

Whooha! Gartner is right this time!

[KamuSan]

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. :-(