FYI, for those interested in certification...
Perlcast 13[1] (from back in June) makes mention of a new vendor
offering a Perl certification test (60 questions, 2 hours), which links
to high-levelcert.com. Apparently they didn't last long, as the site
appears to be dead at the moment (what's
Here, here...
The perl community already has a certification that matters and would
convince any PHB that the person they were hiring was a good candidate.
The Perl Advocacy question is a separate one for reasons I will show
below. In short our current certification goes like this,
typing than expressing an opinion.
Now, to address Greg's message below...
From: Greg London
Sent: Monday, February 28, 2005 11:10 PM
Subject: [Boston.pm] Certification
I think I just figured out why this conversation is going nowhere.
The pro-certification folks think that certification
Bogart Salzberg wrote:
How about an intermediate step: self-testing.
Others have already mentioned Brainbench. 3 or 4 years ago I actually
saw a few Perl programmer resumes with Brainbench certifications listed.
I'm sure if a bunch of Perl people wanted to write a better test,
Brainbench would
On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 15:39, Tom Metro wrote:
As others have argued on the list, as programmers we know certifications
are pointless as a technical qualification, but we're not the audience
that needs to be convinced otherwise.
I disagree. A certification says that you have a certain
Tom Metro wrote:
It would be a start, though I'm not so sure that Brainbench's
web-based, open book tests are close enough to a certification to have
the intended effect.
A self-testing program *need not* suck.
Here are four reasons why a home-grown testing program would be (could
be) better
I think I just figured out why this conversation is going nowhere.
The pro-certification folks think that certification would help
convince a non-technical manager to use perl for a project.
The programmers would determine that perl is the right language
for the job on a technical basis. The
