le, I disagree. Why should I trust your Perl just because a previous employer is happy? If you own a gun and haven't shot yourself in the foot, it doesn't mean I should trust you with my gun.

Elizabeth Castro wrote "Perl and CGI for the World Wide Web". She clearly has Perl experience. Further, some of her previous employers may be happy with the work she has done (if they haven't been hacked yet). However, her actual Perl appears to be pitiful. It's poorly written and has tons of security holes. The same thing can be said of Matt from Matt's Script Archives. Having Perl experience and having good references (can't we all get good references if we list the right names?) doesn't mean we know Perl well enough to be trusted.

If an applicant simply walked out on me, I would rush over to hold the door for them. That says to me one of two things: bad attitude or bad programmer. I've hired too many people to simply trust them and their references to tell me the truth. I need to know for myself.

Cheers,
Ovid

---

---

• Are you posting in the right place? Check out Where do I post X? to know for sure.
• Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags. Currently these include the following:

  <code> <a> <b> <big> <blockquote> <br /> <dd> <dl> <dt> <em> <font> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr /> <i> <li> <nbsp> <ol> <p> <small> <strike> <strong> <sub> <sup> <table> <td> <th> <tr> <tt> <u> <ul>

• Snippets of code should be wrapped in <code> tags not <pre> tags. In fact, <pre> tags should generally be avoided. If they must be used, extreme care should be taken to ensure that their contents do not have long lines (<70 chars), in order to prevent horizontal scrolling (and possible janitor intervention).
• Want more info? How to link or How to display code and escape characters are good places to start.