The Python Paradox (The Python Paradox)

In the latest release of the podcast " Zinc Products " among other things discussed the so-called Python Paradox (The Python Paradox).

Oddly enough, there is almost no mention of this paradox on Habré. Despite the fact that, despite its simplicity, the idea is very interesting

In the far-distant 2004, when Python was something unusual, non-mainstream, an article by Paul Graham was published in which he shared his empirical observation: Python programmers, whom he knows, are much smarter than Java programmers.

Later, Paul explained that he did not mean that Java programmers were stupid. He simply stressed that people who write in Python (then a little-known language) are geeks who program for pleasure; these are people with a broad outlook who see the shortcomings of some languages ​​and the dignity of others.

It is important to emphasize that Java was a common language, and Python is not - that’s the point. It was impossible to find a job on Python, they wrote it only because it was liked as a language, as a hobby.

Transferring this situation to today's realities, one could say that the average Rust or Elixir programmer will, on average, think better than the average "pure" Java or PHP programmer.

From here, Paul Graham makes two paradoxes.

Paul's conclusion for business

If a company chooses a relatively esoteric language for a new project, then those it hires will be excellent programmers, because they have done a great job of learning the language, and they did it for their own pleasure. And they will be interested to work.

Paul's conclusion for the programmer

The language you need to learn in order to get a good interesting job is the language that people learn not only to get a job.

Another couple of my conclusions

1. As they say, you cannot just take back 2004. Now everything has changed, it has become somewhat easier. For example, microservice architecture allows using a zoo of languages ​​and technologies, and thus attracting motivated programmers in esoteric languages, who will work with pleasure for days and even nights, happily solving problems that will get in their way
2. It is not necessary to divide everything into black and white. A mixed approach is also possible. If the project is already written in conditional Java, and it is necessary to hire the javista, then at the interview you should definitely ask in what languages ​​the person has written. If he has githubs there are projects or pullrequests in languages for which you can’t really find a job , then this is FAT plus
3. When a language just releases a stable version, motivated pros write on it. But over time, because of the increased popularity, all the people will fall there, and a bunch of shit will appear. It is especially interesting to observe the Go language: a language with a fairly low entry threshold (the syntax is very simple), and it has become very popular and highly paid. Now there, I feel, the average quality will drop dramatically