Hot new programming languages - according to the TIOBE index

Interesting post by voidspace.

Ruby and Python are doing well, according to the latest TIOBE index.

Java, C and C++ and 1, 2 and 3 on the list

Vasudev Ram
http://www.dancingbison.com

P.S. Dunno why “hot new” though - not too many of them are new. More
like “newly hot” … :slight_smile:

vasudevram wrote:

Ruby and Python are doing well, according to the latest TIOBE index.

Doing well?? Ruby is up 14 points, relatively…ghea! ruby p0wns!11 :wink:

D is an interesting language, though, I must say. Looks like they did
all the things right that C++ did wrong.

Regards,
Jordan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

vasudevram wrote:

Interesting post by voidspace.

Ruby and Python are doing well, according to the latest TIOBE index.

TIOBE == bull… The way the TPC index is calculated is good for about a
laugh, followed by pointing and laughing at people that take it any
seriously.

David V.

PS: What’s the point to linking to your livejournal post where you say
precisely the same as in the mailing list post? If -you- have anything
interesting to say on your blog, then feel free to link to it,
otherwise…
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFHo4wy6MhrS8astoRAkPYAJ0bhASbb4O8EujxBx2YWA7lXB4HTgCeO6VT
fFIAht2jw1WUjdVc0iIwgIk=
=ZAKv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

MonkeeSage wrote:

I must admit that page aroused my curiosity about D as well. I was
singularly – no, plurally – unimpressed with D. It looks like they did
all the things C, C++, Java, C# and all the other C “dialects” do in a
more complicated way. It seems to me to be way to big and complicated.

David V. wrote:

laugh, followed by pointing and laughing at people that take it any

iD8DBQFFHo4wy6MhrS8astoRAkPYAJ0bhASbb4O8EujxBx2YWA7lXB4HTgCeO6VT
fFIAht2jw1WUjdVc0iIwgIk=
=ZAKv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

I think you’re pretty laughable yourself.

Take a look at this diagram in job market:
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=Java-programmer%2C+C%2B%2B--programmer%2C+python-programmer%2C+perl-programmer%2C+ruby-programmer%2C+php-programmer

vasudevram wrote:

I think you’re pretty laughable yourself.

Oh, I know and admit that. Doesn’t make you less of a troll farming hits
on his LJ that’s, as far as I can see, devoid of any actual content
whatsoever. Feel free to disprove me by providing any valuable input for
a change.

David V.

Roseanne Z. wrote:

Take a look at this diagram in job market:
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=Java-programmer%2C+C%2B%2B--programmer%2C+python-programmer%2C+perl-programmer%2C+ruby-programmer%2C+php-programmer

I’m going to make a rather bold claim here. I will claim that the
percentage breakdown of programming jobs by language is for all
practical purposes equal to the percentage breakdown of lines of legacy
code written in those languages that needs to be maintained. In short,
it has nothing to do with the quality of the language, the suitability
of the language for the software in question, whether the language is
“powerful” or “hot” or “productive”, or any factors dealing with the
creation of new software.

So all that chart says is that there are more lines of legacy Java code
that needs to be maintained than there are lines of legacy C++ code, and
more C++ code than the major scripting languages. I couldn’t even find
the Ruby line on the chart because of the color scheme, but I think most
of us can count the major projects implemented in Ruby, including Rails,
on one’s fingers.

The only thing that surprised me on that chart was that C++ was so much
higher than PHP. I’m guessing that’s because PHP was a late bloomer in
the Microsoft world, while C++ was there almost from the beginning –
well before Java, in fact. There’s a lot of legacy PHP code out there,
though.

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

[snip trollfeed]

facedesk

Do Not Feed The Trolls. The nonsequitur reply to my (intentionally
abusive) post to link to more equivalent nonsense was pretty obvious…

David V.

David V. wrote:

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

[snip trollfeed]

facedesk

Do Not Feed The Trolls. The nonsequitur reply to my (intentionally
abusive) post to link to more equivalent nonsense was pretty obvious…

David V.

Nothing is obvious to me any more. I’d rather feed a troll than spend my
days up to my behind in cabbage because nobody else will eat it. :slight_smile:

But seriously, folks – the bulk of programmers I know, myself included,
program for three reasons: because we love doing it, because we are good
at it, and because we get paid. And one gets paid by doing what people
pay to have done.

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

I’m going to make a rather bold claim here. I will claim that the
percentage breakdown of programming jobs by language is for all
practical purposes equal to the percentage breakdown of lines of legacy
code written in those languages that needs to be maintained. In short,
it has nothing to do with the quality of the language, the suitability
of the language for the software in question, whether the language is
“powerful” or “hot” or “productive”, or any factors dealing with the
creation of new software.

Actually, those just a simple search criteria by me.

I original put C, C++, Java, Ruby,… C is extremely high, then I
realized C was also an English letter. I added programmer to make the
search more specific. Then C dropped down from C++. You can search
whatever key word combination you like.

I believe the indeed.com’s searching criteria are simplely from job
posts from Internet, that is all.

It reflects more of past and current job market, not future ones…

Thanks!

David V. wrote:

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

[snip trollfeed]

facedesk

Do Not Feed The Trolls. The nonsequitur reply to my (intentionally
abusive) post to link to more equivalent nonsense was pretty obvious…

David V.

Now, you can see the consistency of indeed with tiobe results

Search Ruby programmer only in indeed.com

http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=ruby+programmer

Take a look at the exciting curve!!!

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:

I’m going to make a rather bold claim here. I will claim that the
percentage breakdown of programming jobs by language is for all
practical purposes equal to the percentage breakdown of lines of legacy
code written in those languages that needs to be maintained. In short,
it has nothing to do with the quality of the language, the suitability
of the language for the software in question, whether the language is
“powerful” or “hot” or “productive”, or any factors dealing with the
creation of new software.

Haha, I added cobol for the legacy purpose:

http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=Java-programmer%2C+C%2B%2B--programmer%2C+cobol-programmer%2C+PHP-Programmer%2C+C-programmer

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs