This thought came to me when I caught myself advocating non-mainstream technologies all the time. I was doing PHP in a company consisted entirely of .NET developers and was advocating Python - and I was only beginning to use Python for anything useful. After I changed my job to a more pleasant one, doing Python and Javascript in a company that has all kinds of developers (but again, mostly .NET/SQL Server) I found myself thinking about advocating Lisp (again, I am only beginning to grasp Lisp). That whole time i actively opposed using my work PC because it had Windows on it, and I was secretly, then in the open, using my Macbook. I was also advocating Mac OS X and Linux to people that clearly were never going to switch. At the moment of writing I'm in a dilemma whether I am deliberately putting myself in the position of an underdog in order to feed my ego. It's good to be the mad scientist. It's better to be not understood and dismissed because they know that behind all that weird talk there's something really special about you. Whether there is or not, it's not important; the real question (and fear of mine) is whether I'm doing this because Python and Lisp is really going to improve my work, or because I'm just feeding my ego. After all, you have to admit, those guys built a pretty big company using c++ and Microsoft MFC and it worked fine for them. Then again, most of the people I've met are of the "I don't want to program after work" type. Is it again egotistical to suppose that these people aren't good programmers? Is my ego to big or am I just inexperienced ?
Asking "is my ego too big?" is like a woman asking "is my ass too big in these jeans?" In both cases "Yes" might be the unwelcome truthful answer.<p>It is one thing to be caught up in the hype of a new product and how you feel about it after having used it for several years and shipped several systems using it. There is a certain buzz out learning and you obvious get it.<p>You actually answer your question. You come across as very inexperienced. You will learn a heck of a lot more if you listen and learn from those who are more experienced than yourself.<p>You will be a lot more credible if you make suggestions on the basis of verifiable results from your own sweat. When you have proof, be the advocate for the technology you prefer.<p>Most people do have a life outside of work and for most it doesn't involve yet more programming. You might consider cultivating some non-programming interests so that you can hold down a cocktail party conversation.
how can i / we tell how good a programmer you are? first, it's hard enough in an interview when you're sitting there answering questions. and second, you are inexperienced, so what you are really asking is not how good a programmer you <i>are</i>, but how good you <i>might be</i>.<p>so it's pointless asking for that kind of an answer here.<p>it seems to me, then, that what you <i>should</i> ask for is advice on (1) how to become a better programmer and (2) how to avoid any problems in the future if you fail (or even succeed) as (1).<p>and i think there are many posts here about how to be a better programmer.<p>as for what to do now to avoid problems in the future, i would suggest not advocating so vocally stuff that you don't understand. use and learn it, by all means, but i don't think anyone appreciates know-it-alls who won't shut up about whatever they think is "the best", especially if they are clueless newbs.