Re: Top 7 Programming Languages That Employers Really Want
James H. H. Lampert wrote:
> The OP wanted this treated as a survey, and so . . .
>
> Many dialects and derivatives of BASIC, including (but not limited to)
> IBM VS-BASIC (ran on 370 and compatible mainframes), TRS-80 Level 1,
> Level 2, and Mod I Disk BASIC, GWBASIC, and the various QBASICs
> (QuickBASIC and QBX). (I took one look at VisualBASIC, and swore off any
> further M$ development tools.)
>
> FORTRAN (mainly FORTRAN IV: IBM G1, WATFIV, and TRS-80 FORTRAN).
>
> Pascal (CDC Cyber Pascal).
>
> COBOL (also on a CDC Cyber).
>
> PL/I (CDC Cyber PL/I; CDC ANSI PL/I; IBM AS/400 PL/I).
>
> Assemblers (DEC Macro-11, 8086).
>
> (LISP) <-- the parentheses are an inside joke.
>
> C (mainly on AS/400s). I must go down to the 'C' again, to the loony
> 'C,' and cry.
>
> Modula-2
>
> MI (it's the closest you are allowed to get to a true assembler language
> on an AS/400)
>
> RPG/400 (both OPM and ILE)
>
> CL (on AS/400s; it's like a shell script, only compiled).
>
> Java
>
> I've forgotten just about all the SmallTalk I ever learned.
>
> I can get by in SQL.
>
> The more programming languages you know, the easier it is to pick up
> additional programming languages. And the less likely you are to treat
> your favorite language (or the only one you know) as a panacea. And if
> you have good linkage capabilities, mixed-language work is not difficult
> at all.
>
> Not much that's on the published list. But then again, when I leave my
> present employment, I'm probably never going to write a single line of
> code professionally again.
>
> --
> JHHL
But James ... this is like a walk through the museum. Are these indeed
languages that "Employers Really Want"?
Reply to: