And why would an “experienced candidate” ever step foot in those shops when they could easily get a job using a more marketable language that probably paid just as much and would make it easier for them to get their next job?

Because that "marketable language" is dull and frustrating?

If you want top talent then you've got to offer something they want; sure you can always pay more, but past a certain point that might not be enough, plus it gets expensive. Using better languages is one of the most effective ways to get noticed by the candidates you really want.

Python, TypeScript, C#, Rust, Golang - none of these seem dull to me, though all languages have some frustration.

4 years of golang always breaking in prod and constant copy pasting was both dull and extremely stressfull.

Having used Scala, I don't think I could go back to any of those. Maybe Rust but even then I'd be constantly chafing at the lack of HKT.

Only Rust and TypeScript might be considered non dull, maybe C#. Python and Golang are as dull as they go.

I work with Python. It's extremely dull and frustrating.

It’s more frustrating to want to leave a job and not be able to find one quickly because your experience is in some obscure language.

When I was in the Enterprise/Corp dev world until a couple of years ago, I could call a few recruiters and have 8 interviews and two or three offers within less than a month. It’s easy to pattern match when you use a popular technology.

Ehh maybe. Sure, if you use a bland corporate language then you can pick up a bland corporate job whenever you want. But what's bland corporate job B going to give you that bland corporate job A didn't?

More money?

Or even the same amount of money when the pay/bullshit ratio starts going in the wrong direction.

You realize all of the BigTech companies use the same “boring languages” don’t you?

Taking a dull job so that it's easier to change to a better paying dull job doesn't seem like a great tradeoff to me. Bullshit definitely happens but again, dealing with a crappy language's bullshit from day 1 so that it's easier for me to switch to another job that will definitely have at least that floor level of bullshit doesn't feel like a great option.

The biggest companies largely use dull languages, sure, although you sometimes find pockets within them that are doing something at least a little nicer (e.g. OCaml at Facebook). So much the worse for the big companies.

You saw my original spiel about going to work to exchange labor for money? I don’t go to work to find excitement. I go to work to provide food and shelter.

My excitement during the first decade of my career came from my working hobby as a fitness instructor and running with friends. In less than a month my “excitement” is going to come from my wife and I living out of two suitcases flying across the country staying in mid tier hotels for a few years.

I could spend my free time learning a new programming language. But I am finding it much more “exciting” learning Spanish so when we stay in Mexico for a few weeks, I can at least be able to communicate somewhat.

If you want a job you can easily switch for an equivalent job, which seemed to be your pitch for using a boring language, then that job is at best going to be a 9-5, which will take up something like half your waking life (at least for the decades when you're the most healthy). I'm a big believer in life and hobbies outside of work (and when I want to learn a new programming language, I look for a way to do it on the clock), but an engaging, interesting job that pays less is often a very worthwhile tradeoff.

I just left a job two years ago that literally paid $100K less than I make now. I am a lot more engaged now…

Not bragging, it’s about what a mid level developer makes at most of the large tech companies.

I definitely couldn’t have afforded my current adventure at my old job nor could I have afforded to retire my wife.

I went the other direction. Took a job that paid half as much as my previous one, but it's interesting work, and I'm a lot happier. Grass is always greener I guess.

> You realize all of the BigTech companies use the same “boring languages” don’t you?

What kind of argument is that? Of course they do, you can’t get away from using JS for front, for example.

But they also use Ocaml, Haskell, Scala.

Because comp is similar and it's fun. Plus I fail to see how working in a less popular language hurts future job prospects. If anything my experience with less popular languages usually leads to a fairly lively, informal discussion during interviews.

Because when you throw your resume out there and a hiring manager is looking for a “full stack developer who knows (Java || C# || Python) && Typescript” why would he choose you over someone who could hit the ground running and add immediate value?

Probably because I'm competent and there is more to adding value than memorizing specific tech. I can't speak to your experience, but as far as mine goes I've never had a problem landing a job.

I'm zero worried about it as it's never been an issue.

So how fast do you think you could get up to speed enough to lead a project creating an Android app if you have no experience in the stack?

If you’re being hired to lead developers and projects, don’t you think you need to know the technology you’re leading?

To be fair I have no idea about the full stack life. I, however, am also not convinced they add "immediate" value. Once you're beyond mid-level being a so-called generalist is not as useful. Most of my work at high senior, and now staff level requires actual deep knowledge of the preferred stack. I have yet to meet a reformed full stack developer in our ranks and there are tons we hire, and even more that come through the door.

I don’t touch the front end development. But I am very much a “generalist”.

- back end development in a few popular languages

- about an average “data architect” for lack of a better word. I’ve led implementations on every type of database imaginable including ETL type jobs and online systems.

- “DevOps” (at least if you give me an AWS account) including setting up networking infrastructure, logging, monitoring, CI/CD, etc.

I’ve led plenty of pre-sales meetings, writing SOWs, pretty PowerPoint slides and architecture diagrams etc.

The “generalist” is very useful when you need someone to lead projects and to understand how everything fits together. I’ve had to wear all of the above hats at startups. Now I wear those same hats at a cloud provider I’m sure you have heard of. I specifically targeted my current position because I wanted to be a generalist.

I’m no special snowflake. Many of my coworkers who came up the ranks in startups and have similar experience can do the same.

perhaps because it was discerned that he is the better programmer in general.

Because I also have prior experience in those and other languages.

I have “prior experience” in any many languages. But I know the ecosystem has changed to the point where someone who has recent experience would be more valuable. That would be like me (hypothetically) saying I had prior experience in JavaScript from a decade ago and I can write JQuery with the best of them.

An organization that prefers ecosystem knowledge to deep knowledge and ecosystem familiarity hints at poor planning and needing someone to "hit the ground running" to fix their mistakes.

I'd pass on such a position.

Also you talk about only having experience in a less popular language as a death sentence.

I've been only writing Haskell professionally for a decade, but I get endless amounts of interview invites for prior experience.

Out of curiosity I went through some of the better invitations interview process and had no issue getting offers either.

If anything mentioning my professional Haskell experience gets me an offer faster no matter the positions requirements.

If a company is looking for senior developers who are to serve as team leads and lead initiatives, why would they hire someone without previous experience in the technology? I’m sure you could eventually get up to speed. But the reason I haven’t had to do a coding interview in well over a decade of working at companies from your standard Corp dev jobs, to companies where they wanted a “tiger team” to lead green field initiatives, to a startup where the then new CTO was looking for someone to lead “cloud native projects” to my current job in the cloud consulting department at BigTech is because I knew the ecosystem well.

When I spoke to CxOs and directors, they wanted someone with a proven track record that could solve their problems. When I was being hired as a dev lead to lead junior C# developers he inherited, what would he look like hiring someone who knew Haskell?

How was i suppose to go from an empty git repo to a fully fleshed out MVP or later from an empty AWS account to infrastructure, CI/CD, to a fully fledged out MVP if I didn’t have prior experience?

If someone is looking to create a new iOS app. Who should they hire? Someone with iOS experience or someone with Erlang experience?

I personally would be hesitant to hire someone who only listed popular technologies on their resume. I’d be worried they would suggest using technologies that improve their resume rather than ones that are good for my business.

Your business is probably not a special snowflake and probably would be served by using the most popular relevant technology. It would be much easier to recruit and to find help.

I personally hate the clusterfuck of the modern front end ecosystem and would avoid it like the plague. But, if I was responsible for choosing the framework to use, I would choose React any day just for recruitment reasons.

Language culture is a thing. I’d rather be surrounded by competent functional programmers than Java developers.