Starling Software

I've been in the industry for too long (though not in low-latency) - I'm doing this to break out of the industry! And I think the finance game is long overdue for a good disruptive technologic event (not implying my humble project is it). R is a personal choice for data analytics (I love ggplot2). But the haskell thing is more than that. It's been done before (http://www.starling-software.com/misc/icfp-2009-cjs.pdf) and even goldman's has a thriving erlang/OCaml hacker ethic (http://www.zerohedge.com/article/aleynikov-code-dump-uncovered).

I'm also in Tokyo, and I'd love to attend one of these. This is the only one I know about, but its primarily about functional programming. http://www.starling-software.com/en/tsac.html

I thought this one is particularly interesting: http://www.starling-software.com/employment/programmer-competency-matr… > Uses Big O notation to denote levels, which is a fun shibboleth. Skills are broken out to Computer Science, Software Engineering, Programming, Experience, and Knowledge. This one has a long record on Hacker News but is a good map of things that we can work on.

The meanings of 'Intermediate' and 'Advanced' are vague and context dependent. The Programmer Competency Matrix has some objective criteria that are language independent. A popular HN discussion of it is here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4626695 And the matrix itself is here: http://www.starling-software.com/employment/programmer-competency-matr…

I've seen a few Haskellers finding similarities and praising Go[1]. Go is just meant to be practical and familiar to most working engineers and all the articles are going to reflect that. Most of the people coming from "advanced languages" are looking for new paradigms to move forward. When it comes to Go, there really isn't much to talk about besides the maturation of the toolchain. [1] http://www.starling-software.com/en/blog/my-beautiful-code/2009/11/22.…

there are still reasonable metrics that could be applied: http://www.starling-software.com/employment/programmer-competency-matr…

link: http://www.starling-software.com/employment/programmer-competency-matr…

Really enjoyed your post. I'm in a similar situation and have been reading up on how to learn the formal CS concepts necessary to ace a technical interview and thought I'd share what I've found. This answer on Quora summarizes the general topics to look into: http://qr.ae/1h6xx More thorough summaries can be found here: http://www.starling-software.com/employment/programmer-competency-matr… and here: http://matt.might.net/articles/what-cs-majors-should-know/

Not precisely answering your question, but I find this "programmer competency matrix" to be a very good guideline of which skills I should try to work on. http://www.starling-software.com/employment/programmer-competency-matr…

Well a three element array does solve that but there are better ways still. http://www.starling-software.com/blogimg/tsac/1011/fremlin-tsac-2008-1… In my opinion the idea that there is a division between functional and non-functional programming at all comes because of a disagreement or misunderstanding with the principles of SICP: C is a perfectly functional programming language if you say that each statement is a function from machine state to machine state. . .

I think the main issues are that lazy evaluation makes it more difficult to reason about the performance of your code, both in terms of what actually gets computed in which thread / on which core, and in terms of space requirements (lazy evaluation can force the runtime to keep things referenced longer than you might expect offhand). I'm not saying a good Haskell programmer can't overcome these obstacles, just that this is definitely a perceived barrier to commercial Haskell development. Check out this paper for a discussion of these issues in a real world Haskell application: http://www.starling-software.com/misc/icfp-2009-cjs.pdf

Here's a link to the PDF where you can actually use your mouse wheel to scroll: http://www.starling-software.com/misc/icfp-2009-cjs.pdf

Oh, they're bad at communication, all right, and not just because of some spelling error. Look at the description of their flagship product: http://www.starling-software.com/en/qam.html What does it do? Who would use it? For what? I have absolutely no idea, and I don't think I'm the absolute dimmest light in the Christmas tree. They use totally general words like "component" without explaining what they mean to them in this context. A component could be an object which implements a specific API, or a set of files with version information attached, or whatever. I don't feel like I know anything about QAM after reading that page. And I don't feel like continuing to learn about it, either. Anyway, I do realize that Starling had nothing to do with submitting this to HN, but I still think they deserve some flameage for the general sense smugness and self-congratulation which one gets from their website, especially since those don't seem be backed up by any world-beating performance.