@bridget99 said:
@blakeyrat said:Forum's fucked. Wrote a long post. Can't post it. Short version: this article is retarded.
Is it really "retarded" or did it strike a metaphorical nerve? I've got no problem with a resume that shows .NET experience, but when someone tells me that .NET is the be-all, end-all solution to all or even most problems on the PC platform, I do lose some respect for that person. If a job candidate's professional and personal projects are all .NET, that indicates to me that this person is basically a die-hard proponent of .NET and I place them in this same (negative) category.
I would at least expect a candidate for "world's best programmer" (which is what this person is trying to hire) to be able to form an answer to the question, "what don't you like about the design of .NET?" Personally, I would answer that question by saying that a good programming environment doesn't necessarily facilitate the creation of heap objects, and that garbage collection - even garbage collection of heap objects - is better handled by stack unwinding anyway. I might go on to question why a virtual machine is necessary for something that basically runs on only one hardware platform. If I had time I would mention that out-of-thread automatic garbage collection makes it radically more expensive to deliver consistent real-time performance.
I might also ask, "what do you like about the design of .NET?" but that's a much easier question. Anyone can parrot MSDN Magazine back to me.
Many (not all) of my criticisms apply to Java as well, which does make me disagree with the exact point of that "retarded" article.
How exactly does someone's preference in programming languages for personal projects or the decision of the managers at their previoius places of employment say anything about them being a diehard proponent of anything?