I don't worry about it. Why should I? :-)

It's pretty much the same story in any large firm. The executives want to see Java developers (or maybe C# these days), because they know the name. They see ads for Java tools and .NET tools everywhere they go. They don't see nearly as much advertisement for Perl stuff, so they are afraid that Perl might be a "fringe" language. These people do not realize that we are too busy using Perl to tell everyone why they should be using it.

The attitude of the executives that I have described is usually called "buzzword compliance", meaning that they are only interested in tools which claim to utilize the latest widely-promoted technologies, or the most widely advertised tools. The sad truth is that many companies which operate based on "buzzword compliance" tend to be the first ones to collapse when things get difficult. Not always, of course, but enough to make me head for the door when the interviewer tells me that their latest product uses "SOAP and XML in a peer to peer environment to generate comprehensive B2B services. Oh, and we need someone with 10 years of .NET experience."

Here's one way to look at it: that Perl job might have a lower official salary than the Java job, it's true. But if the Java company collapses after 6 months while you are still working at the Perl place years down the line, which job will earn you more money?

Of course, any company can screw up and fold, so I have to look at it another way: I like Perl. I don't like Java. If I can get a job using Perl, I will. And as long as there are situations where Perl is the right tool for the task, there will still be paying Perl jobs.

---

I just realized that I was using the same sig for nearly three years.