On Thu, 6 Mar 2008, Daryl Tester wrote: > Well, by plethora I mean 5. And 3 of them seem to be the same job.
Yep, that's a huge amount, not :-) I thought it might be interesting to see the proportions for different languages in different cities for Seek IT Job listings: |-------------+----------+-------+-----------+--------| | Search Term | Adelaide | Perth | Melbourne | Sydney | |-------------+----------+-------+-----------+--------| | Ruby | 2 | 1 | 27 | 58 | | Perl | 4 | 19 | 157 | 312 | | Python | 5 | 5 | 50 | 86 | | COBOL | 5 | 4 | 22 | 42 | | PHP | 9 | 26 | 174 | 312 | | Javascript | 18 | 46 | 287 | 734 | | ASP | 20 | 30 | 172 | 336 | | VB | 29 | 23 | 100 | 332 | | C | 33 | 107 | 234 | 525 | | C++ | 39 | 122 | 228 | 596 | | C# | 53 | 177 | 369 | 1189 | | .NET | 54 | 220 | 609 | 1538 | | Java | 62 | 125 | 631 | 1517 | |-------------+----------+-------+-----------+--------| The dynamic languages don't fare well for job listings. Here's a stack of guesses to explore as to why this might be the case: - Existing programmers within organisations are so productive in moving to dynamic languages that they haven't needed to employ extra programmers even with growth. - Job satisfaction for existing programmers using dynamic languages is higher than when using traditional languages, so there's no need for filling replacement positions. - Dynamic languages aren't popular. - The popular dynamic languages have an interpreter implementation that doesn't lend itself to hiding proprietary code from prying eyes. - It takes 10 to 20 times more people to produce software when not using dynamic languages. I wonder if someone has done a real study on dynamic language use for employment. Chris Foote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Inetd Pty Ltd T/A HostExpress Web: http://www.hostexpress.com.au Blog: http://www.hostexpress.com.au/drupal/chris Phone: (08) 8410 4566 _______________________________________________ sapug mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/sapug
