Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

efinancialcareers.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 595 posts

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#391

Post by jasmer »

jedberg wrote: post #142

There are plenty of talented C++ programmers. They just don't want to be abused by trading firms or work in that culture. Even paying them more won't work, because no amount of money is worth that abuse. I interviewed at a trading firm once, while I was working at Netflix (because Netflix encouraged us to interview for outside jobs at least once a year). The comp would have been double my Netflix salary. But I would…

That's not 'abuse' and it's a material concern they have. It also has something do with the 2x pay.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#392

Post by isbvhodnvemrwvn »

saagarjha wrote: post #377
lopatin wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry what’s bad about making profit from market inefficiencies?

It’s not something that drives obvious value for people.

Don't throw rocks in a glass house, a lot of shit software engineers do does not stove obvious value for people.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#393

Post by dmurray »

nostrademons wrote: post #306
stouset wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The average retail investor just does not need that much liquidity, especially if they're not buying individual stocks (which by and large they shouldn't be).

And the average retail investor pays pennies to market-makers - if a typical spread is 1-2 cents and you make 5 trades a year, you've paid between a nickel and a dime. As with advertising, when you sum up dimes across hundreds of millions of people, it becomes an appreciable amount. Particularly when you also include trades made by institutions on behalf of retail investors. Your 0.5-1.5% management fee on an activel…

> Your 0.5-1.5% management fee on an actively-managed mutual fund is partially going to pay salaries for the fund manager, and partially toward brokerage commissions, spreads, etc. for the trading itself.

Good post but your management fee isn't generally paying for crossing the spread. That's extra slippage.

It may show up as tracking error in the fund (the price was 10.25/10.26, the fund had to buy, it bought at 10.26 and the index trackers said the price was 10.255, it had 0.5c of slippage). But more likely the fund traded in the closing auction, there was only one price so it officially had zero tracking error, but the price was silently a little higher than it would have been if the fund wasn't buying.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#394

Post by TulliusCicero »

dietrichepp wrote: post #114

When I talk to people about careers I see a lot of people with the implicit assumption that because something is technically difficult, it should pay well. Of course, when you say it out loud, it doesn’t sound true any more. The correlation between job difficulty and pay is relatively weak. I do think that one of the contributing factors here is that it’s hard to be as productive in C++ as you can be in other languag…

A job being hard doesn't mean it'll pay well, but a job being quite easy usually means it won't pay well, because it's easy enough to replace whoever's demanding more pay.

Of course, you'll get people here insisting that web dev or whatever pays well and is easy, but try asking actual hiring managers and recruiters how easy it is to find competent experienced devs.

The reality is probably that it is indeed fairly easy for some people who have a knack for the kind of thinking required. But for most people, it's not easy at all, and demand is, of course, very high.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#395

Post by seanmcdirmid »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #394
dietrichepp wrote: post #114

When I talk to people about careers I see a lot of people with the implicit assumption that because something is technically difficult, it should pay well. Of course, when you say it out loud, it doesn’t sound true any more. The correlation between job difficulty and pay is relatively weak. I do think that one of the contributing factors here is that it’s hard to be as productive in C++ as you can be in other languag…

A job being hard doesn't mean it'll pay well, but a job being quite easy usually means it won't pay well, because it's easy enough to replace whoever's demanding more pay. Of course, you'll get people here insisting that web dev or whatever pays well and is easy, but try asking actual hiring managers and recruiters how easy it is to find competent experienced devs. The reality is probably that it is indeed fairly eas…

Ideally, you find a job that’s easy for you and hard for everyone else.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#396

Post by remote_phone »

I used c++ for 15 years but I haven’t touched it in over 10 years now. The language I learned is totally different to the point where I don’t want to learn it. It’s like an entirely new language. The C++11 was the last version I used and to me the modern version of C is trying to do too much.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#397

Post by netheril96 »

cue_the_strings wrote: post #323
jakesgates wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think the many embedded engineers working at Apple, TI, AMD, Intel, etc are paid significantly worse than their higher level software counterparts?

I do, in fact. The reason is that most embedded people are recruited from the ranks of EEs. At least around here (Europe), 1.5-2x more EEs graduate each year compared to CS people, and EEs doing EE stuff are paid even worse than embedded, it's a step up for them. They don't and likely can't ask for more. Surely, some EEs learn CS stuff on their own and start working dev jobs, but they're the exception. I've worked wi…

> At least around here (Europe), 1.5-2x more EEs graduate each year compared to CS people,

Do you know the reason for that? EE is significantly harder to learn than CS, so it baffles me why more people are choosing EE.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#398

Post by poly_morphis »

interactivecode wrote: post #330
jedberg wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8:30 to 5 was required, but also never working at home was required, so what I was trying to (poorly) say is that they basically expected you to live in the office and never see your family. I'll update accordingly. And the comp package I turned down was about $700k at the time, which was 10 years ago. Nowadays it would be a $1M+ job easy. But not seeing my family is not worth any amount of money to me, since there a…

I’ll come hangout at the office for that much, no problemo.

Yeah, for that compensation? No question. I'd maybe try and stay a little while past 5. Not sure how many months (years?) I'd last there though, not knowing how 'intensive' the work culture is.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#399

Post by Pelayu »

From my personal experience it seems that companies looking for C++ devs are far too picky. I have a few years professional experience in C for embedded systems and have written personal projects in C++ but have been rejected from every C++ position I applied for. It seems that companies only want someone with 5+ years experience and are unwilling to take less experienced people on.

Re: The pool of talented C++ developers is running dry

#400

Post by lelanthran »

WorldMaker wrote: post #333
Justsignedup wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's another factor: age If I am a C++ developer, in my late 50s, close to retirement, and know C++ fairly well, don't want to learn a brand new system which I won't be coding in for much longer, and already have my financials all set... I won't be looking for that early retirement big cash payouts. I just want my flow of cash for a good retirement, to go on my vacations, and to buy gifts for the kids / grandkids.…

Related to age factors: so long as the "primary" development language for videogames remains C++ there's always going to be a multi-generational talent pool for C++. Young naive programmers get into videogames until they burn out or are laid off due to ageism then there's "always" "fresh" new C++ talent for other industries too immediately following those videogame roles (assuming the burnout isn't total, such as str…

> Related to age factors: so long as the "primary" development language for videogames remains C++ there's always going to be a multi-generational talent pool for C++. Young naive programmers get into videogames until they burn out or are laid off due to ageism then there's "always" "fresh" new C++ talent for other industries too immediately following those videogame roles (assuming the burnout isn't total, such as strokes).

> COBOL got to where it is when there stopped being entry level jobs for it. Videogames keep a massive entry level door (full of "passion") open for C++. That's going to "naturally" keep C++ development salaries low for the foreseeable future.

Not anymore.

I am frequenting gamedev forums, and reading gamedev chatter in general (seeing youtube videos on game conferences, presentations on games development, etc).

Maybe 1 in 10 of the people in these gamedev places actually program in C++. Mostly they'll use Unity (C#) or Unreal Engine Blueprints, with some Godot getting popular and a few statistical-noise engines being used (Love2d, etc).

What you are saying used to be true; on gamedev forums almost everyone used to be able to program in C++. Now very few do.

Post reply on HN