
If your CV only contains jQuery… - ayende
https://ayende.com/blog/183650-A/if-your-cv-only-contains-jquery
======
FLUX-YOU
What the fuck.

React/Angular is not that complicated to get started with. You can just teach
them on the job and have an opportunity to teach them correctly. These
frameworks aren't some high arcana that you need to take a sabbatical from the
world and isolate yourself on a mountain village to learn.

I dove in and did reasonably well coming from exactly this person's background
with no prior experience except for tutorials.

You basically responded with "We can't afford a single week and a pluralsight
subscription".

>It indicates a lot about the candidate, including the ability to learn and
develop oneself on your own.

Oh nice, let's just ignore 4 years of university + X years at the first job
because that certainly indicates nothing about someone's learning and
development.

Many compsci professors will be sad to learn that Github replaces their entire
usefulness to society.

~~~
safafaf
Would you mind not swearing?

~~~
mercer
Why the fuck would some goddamn swearing bother you, and more importantly, why
would you try to get other sons of bitches from indulging in something so
hecking wonderful? Frick!

------
bionoid
> but I’m certain that they will be able to find another position in a company
> where their jQuery skills will be very valuable. However, I don’t expect
> that they’ll learn anything new in that place, and in 3 years or so, if they
> will be looking for a new job, they will be in the same exact same place.

As opposed to React or any other modern web stuff. Those skills will last a
lifetime.

~~~
noirbot
I mean, if you're at a company that's working in React, it's a decent sign
they're at least keeping up with trends in development, and may be more likely
to let you study and work on the next one when it comes along.

If you're still on jQuery at this point, with no effort to move off it, it's
likely either a small project, or one with excessive tech debt, or one with no
desire to modernize.

~~~
lsjafdlj
> it's likely either a small project, or one with excessive tech debt, or one
> with no desire to modernize.

I disagree. JQuery and React are just tools. Using one or the other doesn't
mean one has more tech debt or its a small project. You should use the one
that gets the job done. By saying JQuery is 'bad' and React is 'good', the
programmer fails to understand the purpose of the tool.

The question the programmer should ask is whether choosing one over the other
has any advantage in that particular project. I program frontend reluctantly
when needed because I am a backend programmer. But I would choose either tool
depending on what is needed.

~~~
noirbot
I would argue my assumptions (and I recognize that they're not always going to
be true) are based specifically off of the nature of the tools in question. If
you're a React shop, and you've recently and competently decided that it's the
best tool for you, that's likely because you're building a large and modular
app that includes data handling of the type that React is good at.

Unless jQuery has added a lot of features I'm not familiar with, it's not
comparatively well-suited to larger and more modular projects like that. These
days, it would mostly be used in projects that are small enough to not need
the extra features from React, are bound to an architecture that makes
implementing it hard, or has management/senior developers who prefer to stay
with older tech.

It's not that one is bad and one is good. It's that they're specifically good
at different things that tend to point to different styles of development and
project scope.

~~~
acdha
I agree with your last point but have seen so much fad chasing that I wouldn’t
be so sure about the assertion that people using React have done that nuanced
analysis. An awful lot of these comparisons come down to what whoever is
leading the project wants on their resume, and I’ve seen a ton of small sites
using huge frameworks because that person didn’t want to learn a few bits of
standard JS or CSS.

~~~
noirbot
I'm not trying to say that most places do that analysis. I was just trying to
frame it in the sense of "it's already been decided, and if you're wanting to
work there, you have to hope it was done competently." It's far from that case
that every project using React is all fad-chasing. Sometimes the new thing is
actually good.

I agree with the lack of analysis portion being a common thing, but that's
something you have to work out for yourself as a part of the process. It's not
as if React is the only faddish tool over the years - I'm sure there are
plenty of older projects that are only using jQuery because it was the new
hotness. And even more that were initially done with jQuery, but would
probably work better with React if it weren't for the Lead's disinclination to
learn a new framework. There's plenty of fad chasing, but there's also plenty
of bull-headed resistance to new tech.

The question of if React or jQuery or Vue or whatever is the best framework to
use for a specific company or product is tangential to the question of if
someone with only jQuery experience can be effective on a team with React as
its core tech. The decisions have been made at that point.

~~~
acdha
Agreed on both directions: my position is that actually doing the analysis
rather than going by gut instincts is less common than it should be for a
field with pretenses of being a type of engineering. Cost analysis is
especially big on that since most JS hype tends to be “3ns faster on this
benchmark!” or “look at how easy this trivial task was!” rather than, say,
development velocity on overhead on a non-trivial project over a year+
timeframe.

------
ransom1538
"It appears that the first job the candidate had after university was
maintaining and building an already existing application. "

First. This is the most difficult software to work on. Something already
created, in production, you must learn what 'they were thinking', make
modifications _AND_ not creating side effects. _Anyone_ , can take on a new
project, google, and pick React. This statement shows a complete lack in
software design experience.

Next. Maybe the person was working at a startup and the startup was stretched
for cash. Maybe this person really believed in the idea and was trying to help
the company survive and thrive. Rewriting everything from scratch is the worst
thing you can do [documented by people with much more credibility [1]] -- so
maybe this person put the company first and worked late nights finishing
features.

Some people do not follow RBF software design principles [Resume build first].
But oh well, you learned React at some point through a web video, so _you_ are
much more valuable employee: bullshit. I hope the person the OP hires, wastes
work hours convincing others to convert everything to 'vue.js' and digs into
why React was a bad choice.

[1] [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-
should-...](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-
do-part-i/)

------
jquast
If the candidate's name were posted, this would be public shaming, plain and
simple. If I were the applicant, heard nothing back, and read this blog post
about my resume, I would be very emotionally upset.

It's hard enough to look for a job...

------
_wmd
This reads more like a no-hire report for @ayande than whoever they were
interviewing. Turning a bunch of confidential interview notes into an article
basically about yourself.. whoa.

The only meaningful tidbit is buried at the end: of course it's important to
demonstrate a willingness to learn, and many people fail to demonstrate that
time and time again.

~~~
meesterdude
> of course it's important to demonstrate a willingness to learn, and many
> people fail to demonstrate that time and time again.

Fuck react. I have tried so many times to pick it up and run with it - but
every time it just gets more confusing and absurd. I have _never_ come across
a technology like this before, with such ridiculous & obscure surface area and
changing implementation.

I mention this because to the casual observer (or hiring manager) it would
appear as unwillingness. But the reality is: not everything can be learned
equally. some people _get_ react in a way they've never gotten anything else
before. I get that, because that's what Rails is for me.

People have limits - React is one of mine. Which is unfortunate given its
popularity.

~~~
sebazzz
> People have limits - React is one of mine. Which is unfortunate given its
> popularity.

If you define those limits and don't get turned down _before_ the interview
you can articulate that in the interview.

------
kerng
Wow, what kind of public shaming is going on here. I doubt the candidate would
even wanna work for this company - if that post reflects how they treat and
talk about folks internally, the candidate dodged a bullet.

~~~
scotchio
Ha, my thoughts exactly. Agree with the author at the end though, but this
reads like a cringy mystery thriller “he put clue of only jQuery on his
resume, I decided to investigate further to this strange mystery of the
CV...”.

In all seriousness, everyone starts somewhere. I have seen people with zero
experience in a technology become complete beasts in months with a little
direction and help - even better (or just as good) than someone with a good
amount of experience. You find the right person willing to learn, it’s a
bargain.

------
candu
Shaming applicants publicly on your blog - not classy. I've no doubt this will
deter many otherwise skilled candidates from ever applying to work with you,
and it opens you to potential liability besides. (If you don't understand this
last part: stop hiring immediately until you do.)

So here's some free advice: don't talk about individual candidates publicly,
not even anonymously, and especially not in such a negative way. It's in
extremely bad taste, and you have nothing whatsoever to gain from it.

------
mariusmg
Really ? So if you don't know React your entire client side knowledge is
automatically useless ? What kind thinking is this ?

Those guys must hire by keywords.

~~~
meesterdude
Been doing html/css/js for 8-10 years; but because I don't know react or
angular I apparently have no frontend experience when talking with recruiters.

~~~
scarface74
Is it fair or rational? Probably not. I'm no front e d maestro and the limit
of my front end skills is html/JS/css + Jquery/HandlebarsJS and Bootstrap.

No one would ever hire me for my front end skills.

But the market has spoken. It's on my agenda to learn at least one front end
framework. ASP.Net MVC isn't going to cut it in today's market.

------
Keyframe
Albeit a bit strange, it's still ignoring the fact that jQuery is good enough
for most of things people do anyways.

------
eksemplar
I don’t understand this article, the author is public shaming people, but
doesn’t him/herself seem to understand what a full stack developer is.

Also, if he does html, css, jquery and ajax and you’d be ok with hiring an
angular dev... then why not hire the guy who actually knows JavaScript?

------
dictum
> I mean, <table> is still how you properly layout things today, as far as I’m
> concerned. However, in a rare moment of self reflection, I have to admit
> that I wouldn’t hire myself to do anything related to the browser.

Extend the moment of self-reflection and ask yourself if you're in a position
to give out advice on hiring _others_.

(For candidates, the implied advice — latch on to buzzwords and be insincere
about your actual knowledge — is unfortunately effective in many places, of
course.)

------
quantumhobbit
This is stupid. If you are a react shop and you would have been ok to see some
Angular on the CV, then you are clearly expecting the new hire to do some
learning on the job. Why not try to figure out if this candidate is up to the
task of learning your framework?

Also I tend not to put technologies on my CV unless I have done something more
substantial than online classes and tutorials. I don’t want to have to answer
an interview question about “what’s your experience with Foo?” with “oh just
some tutorials...” . That would cast doubt on the rest of my experience. Ask
the candidate if they have experience in any frameworks and they might
surprise you and say that they have been learning one in their spare time.

~~~
lfowles
Agreed, I dip my toes in a lot of things but would never consider putting them
on my resume unless I have at least a substantial project that I can talk
about in depth.

------
alexanderdmitri
I think jQuery gets a bad name because of it's historical context. Newer devs
in the field view it as outdated and seasoned devs have seen the mess it can
lead to when just sprinkled in here and there for this and that reason; and as
frontend work became increasingly more programmatic and complex, this sort of
approach becomes pretty hard to maintain.

Because frameworks/libraries like Angular and React were largely adopted due
to this issue, people who have had success with them (or just need to justify
the switch), have come to see these as part of the solution and jQuery as part
of the problem.

If you're an interviewer who only sees jQuery on an application, you can use
this as a chance to get to see what the candidate thinks about the evolution
of web development. See if they can have a reasonable discussion about trade-
offs made on choosing one over the other. This will expose their critical
thinking skills and values as a developer and you may even get a new
perspective yourself. To be honest, I'd rather work with someone who could
have this discussion rather than just blindly adopt what everyone else is
using ... well ... just because.

------
severino
I'd never turn an application down automatically just because the candidate
didn't list the javascript framework of the month in their CV.

In my job -where I'm not in HR- I've seen plenty of candidates with hundreds
of skills listed in their LinkedIn profile, only to find out later, when they
were hired, their complete lack of understanding of the most basic principles
related to the field we're working on.

------
pixelmonkey
The only thing I could think about when I read this post was this classic
tweet:

[https://twitter.com/wesbos/status/598144948559605760](https://twitter.com/wesbos/status/598144948559605760)

------
LoSboccacc
this article contains all that's wrong with the current hiring managers
condensed, except unironically.

from the elitist attitude who jumped the fence off development and pretends to
measure a cv with, by his own admission, outdated knowledge

then there's the shaming of a guy that's just entered the workforce (because
three years are very little all considered, whatever the ba tries to make you
believe) for not being skilled enough in more than the basics, pretending
someone to have experience in dozen advanced frameworks even if it's likely to
be out of place for a junior to start working react/angular off the bat.

there's that shitty management attitude too of "we don't train people here
only leverage existing knowledge" which smells of a very very bad workplace
environment to be, sold as if it were a plus

and the icing on the cake: "I would expect the candidate at this point to
actively work at improving their skills." \- jesus, you can feel the privilege
oozing out of the paragraphs.

~~~
beefhash
> there's that shitty management attitude too of "we don't train people here
> only leverage existing knowledge"

It seems to me that people switch jobs frequently. There's no sense in
training people if they leave before your investment in training pays off. Why
wouldn't you want to profit from the fact that people _can_ educate themselves
on programming skills?

You brought up privilege, but a good and friendly workplace environment _is_
only for the privileged. Potential workers are everywhere, but employment is
scarce. There's no business incentive to bend over for your workers when you
don't have to.

~~~
bradleyjg
> It seems to me that people switch jobs frequently. There's no sense in
> training people if they leave before your investment in training pays off.

This is exactly why golden handcuffs exist.

> Potential workers are everywhere, but employment is scarce.

It's not 2009 anymore. U-5 (unemployed + discouraged workers + marginally
attached workers) is currently less than 5%. The last time it was that low was
Dec 2000. That's all workers of any type. The market for programmers is even
tighter still.

------
woranl
This is bullshit. Hiring by keywords and hype? How about actually ship
software that actually works. Unbelievable.
[http://mir.aculo.us/2015/08/25/how-to-actually-ship-
software...](http://mir.aculo.us/2015/08/25/how-to-actually-ship-software-
that-actually-works/)

------
gorbachev
The article describes the perfect recipe for hiring the same type of a person
for every open role.

------
Kenji
With the mentioned tools, you can build a fantastic and bloat-less website.
Like HackerNews. The person who sent that CV could build the HackerNews
frontend.

It all depends on what your goals are: Do you want a modern, bloated, ugly,
generic, JavaScript framework heavy site or do you want to put actual content
out there in a beautiful, professional and minimalist manner? Your choice.

~~~
meesterdude
I like that modern = bloated, ugly, generic javascript; and professional =
beautiful, minimalist. And agree!

I consider it unprofessional to rubber stamp SPA as an approach. Yes, it's
"modern" but often overkill. I am all about choosing the right tool/approach
for the job. 9 times out of 10, that means HTML/CSS and a sprinkling of JS.
For all other times, there's SPA.

