Will knowing esoteric languages help with interviewing for jobs that don't require them?

Question

I have some knowledge (mostly forgotten) of a couple of non-mainstream languages, such as Prolog and Scheme. I definitely don't know/remember them well enough right now to pit on a resume, e.g. I would not be able to coherently answer questions from an interviewer about them. However, with a bit of reading up and remembering stuff, I could fairly quickly (couple of weeks) bring myself up to the level where they would be resume-mentionable.

I will 99% likely be interviewing for positions that don't require any skill with either language (and, probably no direct skill with either functional or declarative programming).

The question is, is it a plausible plus to invest a couple of weeks in polishing up either of them, hoping that having them listed will bring in extra brownie points? (e.g. interviewers would be impressed with me being flexible enough to not only know procedural/OO stuff, or would be impressed with me knowing 2 more languages than I now list)?

Or would it be a pointless waste of effort that should rather go towards working on my primary skill set improvement?

I'd like to hear the reasoning one way or another from people who do conduct technical interviews.

Answer 1

If I were an interviewer, I might ask you about the languages - but looking for evidence that you're interested in the benefits of certain ways of looking things, rather than ability to code. Knowing different languages often lets you look at a problem from different points of view, and that's an interesting thing to talk about at an interview.

Quite whether that means you would have to do more work (to rediscover the idioms and purposes behind the languages) or less work (I don't need to see working code, just have a conversation) probably depends on how well you knew them before.

Answer 2

I'm a technical recruiter for an internet startup. Displaying knowledge in non-mainstream languages shows a bit of initiative, but that's about it. We need people who can code in the languages we currently use, and who can get it done fast.

Answer 3

I think it does help, at least a little.

Having knowledge of esoteric languages demonstrates that you've experimented with various different paradigms and have adapted to them. Being able to learn different ways of thinking is important in computer science.

Given two applicants, one with only mainstream languages, and an identical one with a few weird languages sprinkled in. I would tend to favor the one with the extra. So long as his skills in the required language are up to par.

About actually brushing up on them. I might read a little to help remember what some core libraries are and how they work, but I wouldn't bother getting the syntax 100%.

Answer 4

If your choices are:

1. Brush up on esoteric languages you're not likely to be able to use in your would-be job
2. Brush up on your primary skillset in a language you're going to use in your would-be job

Then spending time on 1. would mean "You don't have your priorities straight".

As for knowing about lots of tools, that might count as "cares about his/her profession". Often, different languages and tools provides different ways of thinking about a problem, and might come in handy, even if you never actually write a single line of code in that language ever again. I have a background from assembly programming, and I never envision myself writing a single line of Intel compatible assembly code ever again, but knowing what I know now about the way the computers and processors work gives me invaluable insight into why things work the way they do today.

But then, if I were to spend time brushing up my assembly language skills at the cost of improving my C# skills, for a potential new job.... That would probably scream "easily side-tracked" or "confused about priorities" to a potential employer.

At least it would to me.

Answer 5

Mentioning unusual languages should theoretically be OK, but be careful. I can't be the only one who has had bad experiences with coworkers who kept going on and on about how their favorite languages and platforms were so much better than what we were working with. It was terribly annoying.

Of course I'm not saying that you would be like that. But some managers might be hesitant to hire someone they perceive as being likely to 'rock the boat'.

Answer 6

I don't think a couple of non-mainstream languages would hurt at all, and as others have said, would show some mental agility.

As others have also said, while Scheme isn't as common as C/C++, Java, or Python, I certainly wouldn't consider it esoteric. MIT taught beginning programming with it for decades, and I'm learning it myself right now.

If I were you, I'd go ahead and put those languages on my resume but not bother to brush up. My resume lists all kinds of technologies I used years ago but am rusty on, like Palm OS programming and SQL. If anybody asks, I can talk generally about them, and if asked in more detail, I say, "I last used that X years ago and it's rusty, but I could come back up to speed quickly." That's never been a problem, and I just unexpectedly wound up fixing a SQL bug a few weeks ago.

Now, if your whole resume consisted of really obscure languages, you might have problems. Or you might want to apply at Google.