Ted Neward

"However, Java is the only language that would compile providing huge security benefits. The IP is protected."?!? Has nobody here ever actually looked at the JVM bytecode set, or worked with a Java decompiler? The IP is not protected in any way, shape or form. (And every .NET language is compiled to a bytecode set, just as JVM-based languages are, so any benefits derived from bytecode compilation are just as applicable in the CLR-based world as they are in the JVM-based one.)

Jim/David: Scala is one of the languages I'm planning to use as part of the exercise. While I think the *implementation* of a pattern may be radically different (and in many cases simplified) using Scala, the *concept* of the pattern remains strong and is just as relevant to the Scala developer as the Java developer. Plus, I'm trying to incorporate a few functional pattern languages into the mix, to see where/how they fit. C'mon over and help. :-)

Only comment I'll make is simply that the series on my blog (http://blogs.tedneward.com) is the best place to put commentary on the patterns and/or the catalog; I don't check DZone comments, but comments to my blog get emailed to me as soon as they're posted, so I can keep up with the thoughts and comment back if necessary/desired.

(Wish I could maintain both, but there's only so much bandwidth one guy has got, and I'd rather spend it on the patterns themselves, to be frank. :-) )

Caleb: We're not looking over your shoulder while you're doing the test, far from it. You're doing that on your machine, in your home (or Starbuck's, or wherever you want to code), using your favorite tools. As for the "pairing", that's something that we do, in fact, do as part of our work day, so if you're not comfortable with pairing, then yes, you're probably not going to be comfortable working with us. We believe that we are long past the days when one programmer can just hide out in the corner writing code for 8 hours a day--particularly not in a consulting engagement.

Cosmin: Well, if you're not comfortable with giving us samples of your work, then we're not comfortable putting you in front of our clients, so it sounds like we both walk away a winner.

James: I'm not sure asking you to spend *at most* 10 hours working on a pretty simple project is asking you to "forego your personal life". And, if you have detailed questions about the role, we're more than happy to talk about it, but when we have 10 or 20 candidates at a time, we're not exactly willing to spend 10-20 x 2 hours on each person, either, particularly when we have no idea if that candidate is even remotely skilled enough. But yes, you're correct--we are pushing some of the responsibility back on to the candidate, because we're really not interested in candidates that aren't serious about working for us.

The concepts are the important part; the language shouldn't matter.

Having said that, if the demand is high enough, I'll work with Ken to create a set of Scala examples to go along with the F# ones.