robin_bb

ZeroMQ and its descendants will outlive us all. Pieter, you should be proud to have achieved so much.

Actually, this is a great opportunity for YC alums to deliver some of PG's knowledge to non-alums.

I look forward to discussing my ideas with PG-bot.

I consider this to be a failure of a GPL-licensed open source software project. Samba is not being used by Solaris, nor by Mac OS X.

prewett, which are the tools that you think already exist, exactly?

Many Mozilla developers make good use of valgrind. Leaks that can be found that way often are, and rarely cause problems for long.

I disagree. Haskell is more difficult to master. There's far more to it than C++. I am highly proficient in both languages, it so happens.

Of course, there can be no objective measure easily made, and I do not want to engage in language wars.

That said, I am a C++ expert, but contend that each of Lisp, Haskell, and Scala are far deeper languages, with more involved in their mastery than C++.

No, UncleOxidant, it is definitely not "especially true for C++". There are plenty of powerful languages out there, many with more subtleties than C++, and longer roads to mastery.

No one disputes that C++ has a long road to mastery, but there are plenty of other languages for which that is true. So, C++ is not special in that way.

Learning to program well in language X can actually be done using language Y, for some X's and Y's, especially when Y has the features of X.

So, I continue to argue that asking precisely for language X may well exclude better applicants - ones smart enough to program in Y instead of X!

Obviously, I disagree. Such a filter will exclude precisely the wrong candidates. That is my argument in the article.

kailoa makes a good point: removing keywords from the job posting risks not appearing in a potential employee's search.

I think that the trick is to have "just the right" keywords, and no more. The particular example that I give in the article has too many. So, fewer is better, in that case.