>It says here that you only understand OOP paradigms. Would you care to explain how you intend to stay relevant in this rapidly-changing industry?
By learning other stuff? At least i didnt invest in meme functional paradigm that is useless
Would any of you care to tell me about the sort of functional or other paradigmatic programming you're all doing at this weblog startup?
>It says here that you only understand OOP paradigms
Why would anyone put that on their resume?
>>54556675
I had to use things like callback functions and programmable pipelines when making games in C (as a hobbyist). Other 'design patterns' are also easier to implement using functional paradigm
Can't say much about aspect-oriented programming, and I've never tried reflective, but even just having map, reduce, filter makes my professional devving a TON easier
>>54556697
More interestingly, why would anyone interview someone who has that on their resume
>>54556675
>>54556670
Most web-oriented startups use JavaScript, so functional programming and prototypical inheritance are really, really big right now.
Perhaps you didn't see my portfolio...
By the way, my price just went up to 120k
>>54556697
In defense of the OP (not that he deserves it), it would be reasonable to infer that you only understood OOP languages if your resume listed something like
>proficiency in
>Java, Python, JS, C++, [etc...]
with nothing being definitively non-OOP.
but this is idiotic. if a company wants non-OOP programmers (let's say functional, but we could just as easily sub in the assumption that they need declarative-instead-of-imperative, or any other dichotomous choice), then they shouldn't have called in some guy who listed a bunch of OOP on his resume.
Haskell and these other languages showing up on a resume *still* offers very good signal (compared to other languages) that you know your shit. you shouldn't be wasting your time interviewing generic candidates if you know your needs align with FP or something non-OO.
>Under "sexual partners" you've written "N/A." Would you like to explain this discrepancy?
>>54556675
>he's never heard of JS
shit lad, that language is 'throwing functions like it's going out of business to other functions and object members'
>>54556720
prototypical inheritance is an OOP concept. JS is functional in perhaps the loosest possible sense. if someone said they knew JS, I wouldn't think "oh, a functional programmer". if you know FP, you would signal it by claiming Haskell, Erlang, or maybe Prolog (if they had basically no industry experience and took a class involving it).
>>54556750
I-I was hoping that y-you'd be my first, senpai.
>>54556750
ask ur mum lmao
>>54556770
see >>54556773
If you consider JS to be functional, it's about as functional as Python is for its inclusion of things like map and lambda.
>>54556750
>Under "sexual partners"
A sexual parterns heading in a resume?
>>54556773
That's a very loose way of thinking. Most OOP languages include other paradigms, so by that definition, you couldn't signal you use OOP from those languages
>>54556796
So what are they then? They're not OOP since they have functional and reflective paradigms. They're not reflective because they have functional and a loose OO paradigm
>>54556798
knowledge of OOP isn't a closely guarded status that i need to verify. If someone told me they knew OOP I would take it with about as much skepticism as if they told me the sunrise was nice this morning (that is to say, almost none).
Claiming knowledge of FP is much more dubious. Most people learn imperative, procedural, and/or OO programming, and declarative functional languages like Haskell tend to confuse students enough that many avoid it. Some schools (and by "schools" I mean ways of thinking) opt to teach FP first (I think this is more common in Australia, but Lisp/Scheme and others like it used to be taught elsewhere), but these are not only in the minority - they're vanishingly rare cases.
>>54556808
Python is a primarily OOP language with some elements of other paradigms.
Don't act like you're confused about this. Natural languages don't have existential crises like this just because they borrow a few terms or even entire grammatical rules from other language origins.
>It says here that you consider goto statements harmful. Do you have any solid evidence to back up this stance, or are you just parroting what others have always told you?
>>54556628
I don't think you three quite understand. I poo in the loo exactly zero times a day.
>>54556832
>Claiming knowledge of FP is much more dubious
Considering you equate it to FP languages close to pure FP, that's probably why your opinion is a little skewed
Nobody uses OOP that's close to pure OOP. When I worked with Java programmers, they were heavily using aspect-oriented and functional paradigms ala Java 8 and Spring. Not even that language feels pure OOP with that framework anymore.
>>54556844
Python's implementation of OOP is lackluster, you could barely say it's primarily OOP. From my experience, it's primarily procedural/functional, classes are used about as much as dicts
>>54556855
Check out this paper by renown computer scientist, Edsger Dijkstra. It's titled, "Goto Considered Harmful".
>>54556750
I'd be so happy to get asked this... do you realise JUST HOW MUCH SHIT you can get a company into for sexual discrimination? I'd literally sit back, put my feet on the table and ask for a $50,000 settlement not to immediately go to MSM and get his ass fired.
>>54556786
kek'd
>>54556855
Has anyone in here ever had an interview with so many people sitting across from?
>>54556877
>I take that as a yes
>>54556890
At my current and previous IT job, it was just 2 people, with no meme questions
>>54556890
Yeah man, definitely. It's not really intimidating though, they all get to know you and just quiz you on basic shit like "What's the difference between REST and SOAP?"
>>54556877
>We here at Zlqa are the disruptive and entrepreneurial type who seek to break the mould of possibilities. I'm not sure if your craven appeal to authority resonates with me
>>54556895
So you don't consider a whole technical letter as solid evidence? What kind of fantasy world do you live in when a technical letter is not solid evidence and why would I want to work for you in such a world?
>>54556910
Pay me 6 figures now or 9 figures later when I'm selling my IP, chummo.
Your choice.
>Under "editor" you've written "emacs." Why not Atom?
>>54556910
If there is a right answer and a wrong answer out there, then who are you to tell me that he's wrong? If there is no authority on these matters, then there's no point in having a right answer as every answer is equally valid.
>>54556918
>a whole technical letter
>that's not even relevant by today's standard
>>54556929
>Atom
>using a bloated web browser for an editor
Sublime if editor. Jetbrains if IDE
>>54556798
>A sexual parterns heading in a resume?
If it needs a high level government security clearance, it'll be there.
>>54556870
>Python's implementation of OOP is lackluster,
basically everything in python is some kind of object that brings inheritance, attributes, methods, etc... with it. you can argue at me that other languages do more to be OO, but this satisfies the definition of an object oriented language. it is primarily this.
python has iterators/generators, but it's not considered a pure functional language, and seeing as people here are generally unclear what functional languages are, i figured that using impure examples (where their association with FP is highly variable and even dependent on what the programmer is doing within the language), referencing pure examples like haskell just made more sense.
if aliens came to earth and asked what a human was in its "platonic" form, you wouldn't submit caitlyn jenner. you'd find some muscular male and some effeminate female.
>>54556932
>After careful consideration I'm afraid we're going to look elsewhere. Thank you for your time
>>54556958
>but this satisfies the definition of an object oriented language.
Does not make it primarily OOP. In some other languages, functions, and even primitives have their own variables or functionality. In some functional languages, this is true
>but it's not considered a pure functional language
Didn't say that, just that your idea of a FP language is a pure FP language whereas your idea of an OOP language isn't pure OOP
>if aliens came to earth and asked what a human was in its "platonic" form, you wouldn't submit caitlyn jenner. you'd find some muscular male and some effeminate female.
Shitty analogy aside. If someone asked what python was and you said primarily OOP over multi-paradigm, you'd be laughed out.
Real question guys, don't get mad.
What is a purely functional language good for?
>>54556969
Thank's, I dodged a bullet wasting my time with morons.
>>54556990
Python is multi-paradigm but I have no problem working with it in pure OO style. By that measure, I have no problem calling it an OO language.
>>54557010
>By that measure, I have no problem calling it an OO language.
Cool, then you wouldn't mind people calling Python/JS a functional language then
>>54556990
true, but "multi-paradigm" is about as useful an answer as "lots of shit, man".
If you're trying to convince me that Python is roughly equal parts FP and OOP, you're wasting your time. I've used python too much to buy that. if instead you're trying to convince me that it's *more* FP than OOP, then you're even further gone than the first case.
>>54557026
I've used Python for virtual machines, as a professional webdev, language interpreters, assembler+compiler for my own languages, competitions.
At no point did I think 'this language feels more OOP than FP'.
Maybe in your personal experience Python is OOP, but in mine, it's far from it
>>54557019
Sure, if I could use those languages in a functional way. AFAIK, only JS lets me treat functions as first class objects allowing me to write purely functional code in JS.
>>54556744
Why would anyone that's not a fresh college grad put languages on their resume? It's assumed that if you know how to program, you can work in any language after a few weeks of training. Nobody asks about languages you know except in internships and entry level gigs.
>>54556954
not true.
t. has held a ts/sci before :^ )
>>54557079
Well you can, easily.
Even if you tried to use it in a pure OO way, that would be difficult. You'd need to call main or have expressions outside your classes to use them
>>54557063
You should ask more people, then. Your experience of Python is distinctly different from the vast, vast, overwhelmingly vast majority of Python users. I would even guess that you probably haven't used as broad a slice of Python as most people, if your experience led you to feel pretty consistently that it was more FP than OOP.
There's an avid FP community around Python, but nobody would claim that it's a pure implementation, or that it dominates the OOP aspect of it. but python is by its nature flexible, which makes it amenable to people that want to employ OOP aspects into their work, FP, or whatever.
>>54557091
Well, I was asked. Maybe they just looked at you and assumed...
>>54557089
If the job description asks for "C# programmer" with demands for various .Net technologies, you should be expected to have some sort of experience in those specific technologies. If the job description demands "a computer programmer to implement software systems", then you'd be correct.
>>54557105
>You should ask more people, then. Your experience of Python is distinctly different from the vast, vast, overwhelmingly vast majority of Python users. I would even guess that you probably haven't used as broad a slice of Python as most people, if your experience led you to feel pretty consistently that it was more FP than OOP.
I've had to use it in vast ways for competitions, even including using its OO functionality.
I've had to use it in my job, you use objects to subclass Django objects, but you deal more with functional aspects, and in Flask, it is more functional.
I've used a vast number of libraries, numpy, matplotlib, image processing
I can still say it's more FP than OOP in my experience, but even if you don't agree with that, it's still not right to call it OO either
>>54557089
>Why would anyone that's not a fresh college grad put languages on their resume?
To signal some amount of expertise with those languages (beyond familiarity)
It's assumed that if you know how to program, you can work in any language after a few weeks of training.
Is this a serious question? What's on your resume? A few days should get you capable of writing rudimentary JS or Python code, but knowing the ins and outs - the quirks, the useful bits of information that generally take experience to acquire, etc... all take time.
The only time i've ever been willing to teach someone a language was when i needed them to do rudimentary work in the first place. if i want someone to contribute to existing code, i need to know that this will be more familiar to them than the base level of recognizing how to evaluate shit.
>Nobody asks about languages you know except in internships and entry level gigs.
this is just wrong. go find people in your area and look for their resumes. it shouldn't be hard to do.
>>54557105
>but nobody would claim that it's a pure implementation
Also I don't know why you keep bringing this up. I've already said it's not pure anything. Just that you can't refer to FP languages using pure FP languages if you don't do the same with OOP languages
>>54557114
nah m8, anybody that asked you that was fucking with you.
>woo, Mr anon, Your credentials are simply remarkable!! not only did you save my Father's life by installing Ganoo Linux on his pacemaker but you can also fizzbuzz in over 15 different languages, I'll have you complete this form for me now and we can have you working here as soon as tomorrow.
>Sir, it seems you have forgotten to list your facebook account, please can you write it- here just above your signa... .uhhh... sir?!? sir!?!?
>>54556929
AYY
>>54557422
>wanting to be spied on
Fuck the job, bitch
>>54557422
>wow mr anon
>thanks for making the brew package manager, 90% of our engineers use it daily at our company!
>I'll just require you to write a simple binary tree reversing algorithm, it should be a breeze, for someone of your caliber
>Sir?
>>54557456
>>54557127
.NET isn't a language though. It's a set of frameworks and tools. If someone put C# on their resume, that doesn't guarantee they've ever even touched .NET. So people put in the job description that they're looking for people familiar with tools, libraries, and frameworks. Hence .NET developer and not "C# developer".
>>54556877
>appeal to authority
in assembly you wouldn't be even able to make simple loop without GOTOs (jumps)
>>54556918
>"...or are you just parroting what others have always told you"
Explain yourself why it's bad
Are we just gonna ignore the fact that C++ is multi-paradigm and not OOP? You can even stick functional C shit into a C++ program. Hell, you can write an entire C++ program in C if you want to
>>54557456
>>54557474
we've discussed this so many times that it's trite. if you have nothing to offer but reaction images, then stop bringing it up.
a company has a right to assess you in whatever skill-based way it wants. they're determining whether you're suited to work at their company for money; it's not your call, it's theirs.
but more to the point, formal education would have taught you about things like b-trees, and while it's entirely possible that you can build something profoundly useful for millions of people, that doesn't necessarily mean you have a comprehensive understanding equivalent to a formal curriculum.
it's totally reasonable that google would say that every engineer needs the basic foundation of CS education, including b-trees, in case some work the engineer is doing would benefit from that knowledge. lots of self-taught people find these remarkable ways of avoiding learning things, like when someone teaches themselves how to drive a car but carefully avoids practicing parallel parking.
the problem is that in engineering you don't necessarily see all the parallel parking spaces, reminding you that you need to acquire that skill. you just keep going on your merry way, using what you *do* know to get some stuff can, without ever realizing that you could accomplish some of those things more efficiently (or indeed that some problems can be accomplished trivially with the benefit of something like a binary tree).
so aside from the fact that google absolutely is entitled say "please enter the name of the university you got your BS from, or quietly leave" (and maybe lose a lot of good engineers, but that's their prerogative), they're not being crazy by asking you to do something simple that anyone who studied CS in their undergrad should be able to do.
>>54558257
I was mocking the macfag that couldn't reverse a tree, not Google's HR, tho.
>>54558340
ah, okay. it's really not clear which party you're expressing disbelief in based on literally just a picture.
can you rephrase the question in the form of a factory
>>54558346
I didn't post a picture, I'm >>54557456, the pic of the one I quoted inspired me the greentext.
>>54558172
>C
>functional
god damn retards in this board
Where am i? Who are you people? what the fuck is an OOP paradigm? Oh god i fell asleep in my bed how the fuck did i get here?
>>54556877
A goto statement says nothing about your code. Why is it there? In the vast majority of cases, there are other constructs in the language that are a far better fit for what you are trying to say. It's why you use a for-each loop as opposed to a for or even a while loop any time you can. It makes your code more readable and maintainable.
>>54557736
And that is one of the reasons nobody uses assembly unless they absolutely have to.
>rapidly changing
>c like shit is still the most popular language after 40+ years
Call me when they use pure functional languages
>>54556675
Scala, F#, Clojure m8
>>54557004
Quering, sorting with patterns, etc
>JavaScript
>functional
Damn retards, it isn't even multi paradigm
Scala and F# is multi paradigm, with Scala more unique in its own way
>>54556773
Why prolog? I'd associate prolog with logic programming, not functional.
pure functions are useless, you need side effects
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iSmkqocn0oQ
>>54558632
Exactly, Prolog is not functional. It is a declarative logic language.
>>54557456
>thanks for making a package manager which removes things instead of fixing them when they break and comes with google analytics
I'd kick you out of the interview right then and there.
>>54558665
nice meme video
>>54558353
unfortunately yes
>>54556855
I want to throatfuck that blondie.
>>54556628
wait, is it by any chance sir on the right related to either hideo or kojima ?
>>54558665
Totally disagree.
I've worked mostly with Erlang in this area. It is entirely possible to write a program with no side effects using pure functions. You just design the software system carefully. That's not to say side effects are bad.. but the less the better.
More state changes more problems.
>>54556855
I want to throatfuck that blackie
>>54557089
>It's assumed that if you know how to program, you can work in any language after a few weeks of training.
>few weeks of training
>training
Oh sweet summer child
>Human resource with no programming background whatsoever
