> a language is far more than syntax. There is the ecosysystem, frameworks, third party packages, etc.
Agreed. However, if you're a software company you've already likely made all of those decisions. If I come work for you, I'm stuck with them. It doesn't matter if I like the package manager or the frameworks. That's just the background against which we work.
Our work is making our lives better, and solving the company's problems to the best of our ability, given all those constraints.
> honestly, I would be more concerned about hiring someone who built their own bespoke framework from scratch
Yes! I feel honestly quite nervous about sharing that aspect of my work, because I worry people will see me as out of touch.
But I am quite up front that I don't advocate using my toolkit in production environments. My professional advice is usually quite conservative. I tend to advocate for minimal disruption and using standard tools as they were meant to be used.
However, because I do that all day at work, I see all the cracks and warts in the architecture and when I go home I want to work on the future.
And even though you are correct "building a framework rarely adds business value"... that's not what motivates me. I do think there is value being created, and I will eventually be able to cash in on that. But I am doing it because I am interested in the future, and I want to work on tools that transcend the pointless busywork I have to deal with day to day, in the name of meeting quarterly goals (which TBF is crucially important in a business context).
I get direct enjoyment from working in my own little hobby world where those constraints don't exist, and that is enough motivation for me.
Agreed. However, if you're a software company you've already likely made all of those decisions. If I come work for you, I'm stuck with them. It doesn't matter if I like the package manager or the frameworks. That's just the background against which we work.
Let’s say you learn C# in “two weeks”. Is that going to be enough time to get proficient with ASP.Net MVC? Entity Framewor? IIS? The built in logging framework? The DI framework? Middleware? What if they are using Xamarin for mobile? Let’s say you did pick up Xamarin (which I haven’t).
Would you know the fiddly bits about doing multithreaded processing with desktop apps using Windows Forms?
Agreed. However, if you're a software company you've already likely made all of those decisions. If I come work for you, I'm stuck with them. It doesn't matter if I like the package manager or the frameworks. That's just the background against which we work.
Our work is making our lives better, and solving the company's problems to the best of our ability, given all those constraints.
> honestly, I would be more concerned about hiring someone who built their own bespoke framework from scratch
Yes! I feel honestly quite nervous about sharing that aspect of my work, because I worry people will see me as out of touch.
But I am quite up front that I don't advocate using my toolkit in production environments. My professional advice is usually quite conservative. I tend to advocate for minimal disruption and using standard tools as they were meant to be used.
However, because I do that all day at work, I see all the cracks and warts in the architecture and when I go home I want to work on the future.
And even though you are correct "building a framework rarely adds business value"... that's not what motivates me. I do think there is value being created, and I will eventually be able to cash in on that. But I am doing it because I am interested in the future, and I want to work on tools that transcend the pointless busywork I have to deal with day to day, in the name of meeting quarterly goals (which TBF is crucially important in a business context).
I get direct enjoyment from working in my own little hobby world where those constraints don't exist, and that is enough motivation for me.