John Porter wrote:
> Elaine -HFB- Ashton wrote:
> >
> > However, every other profession seems to have some way of judging the
> > competence and skills of its ranks. It would seem to be something Perl
> > should revisit.
>
> Well, there are plenty of models we could look at even within our
> own profession, and that would probably make more sense.
> Some languages, like COBOL, VB, and Java, have certifications.
> Others, like C and C++, don't. Oh, I'm sure there are companies out
> there happily certifying people in C++, but on the street, certs
> are not the currency for these languages, they way they are for
> those other languages.
>
> This, I believe, works well, and is a credit to the C/C++ community.
> It would be a credit to our community as well.
But Perl's case is complicated by its "low barrier to entry",
a non-issue with C/C++.
There are lots of "Perl programmers" who learned Perl after
being an "HTML programmer" (sic).
(not to imply that that path can _never_ lead to a "good" Perl
programmer, just that it is more likely the exception rather
than the rule.
)
Employers feel a _need_ to be able to distinguish between
"script kiddies" and "real programmers" (please ignore the
connotations of the names I chose, alternate phraseology
welcomed).
Currently they have to get some of the applicant's code, or have
a face-to-face interview, to determine their basic Perl competence.
If there was a reputable certification, they would not have
to be concerned with that issue.
--
Tad McClellan SGML Consulting
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Perl programming
Fort Worth, Texas
