But if you hire "programmers" and train them in F# on the job instead of looking specifically for "F# programmers" you sidestep that problem.
My organisations job ad is looking for people with "several years of programming experience by the way we do things in C# and F# but do not expect you to have".
Then we weed out the huge majority by issuing a tiny take-home code test (think a few fizzbuzz-style questions) that applicants can complete in whatever language or environment they want.
So far, we've received positive feedback on the approach, but also very few truly talented applicants. I think the latter is because we're extremely picky, but I don't know.
What I do know is that we wouldn't get better or more qualified applicants by limiting our search to a few languages. Some of the best so far have come with a language we would never have thought to list.
Thank you for sharing your feedback. Your approach certainly makes sense and I'm also not a fan of listing specific programming languages (as well as stacks, frameworks, platforms or products) as strict requirements. However, in my book, it makes sense only for mature companies and later-stage startups. Early-stage (especially, bootstrapped, small and non-VC-backed) startups simply cannot afford to spend time for training on the job.
I think with the right, bright people, they'll train themselves in no time. But sure, that shifts the problem from getting "people who know F#" to "people who are very intelligent and experienced", which might be equally hard if not more so.
I believe it's worth it, but have no data to back it up.
My organisations job ad is looking for people with "several years of programming experience by the way we do things in C# and F# but do not expect you to have".
Then we weed out the huge majority by issuing a tiny take-home code test (think a few fizzbuzz-style questions) that applicants can complete in whatever language or environment they want.
So far, we've received positive feedback on the approach, but also very few truly talented applicants. I think the latter is because we're extremely picky, but I don't know.
What I do know is that we wouldn't get better or more qualified applicants by limiting our search to a few languages. Some of the best so far have come with a language we would never have thought to list.