11–20 of 45 posts
So according to this post, companies are only going to hire the top 0.5% of programmers to their entry-level positions. Something is seriously wrong with this employment model if 99.5% of the labour pool can expect to never find work.
The bottom 99.5% of chronically unemployed tech hopefuls is a very different group than the bottom 99.5% of software developers.
These questions cover language-specific keywords of a specific programming paradigm.
Even so, most employers that we work with won't even consider job seekers who don't have this stuff down.
That's not the point, it means different things to different programming languages, which means there is more than one correct answer unless you get more specific.
Further, it's virtually irrelevant to Python programmers since the OO model there is "we're all consenting adults".
Have what down? You haven't even stated a well-formed question.
I think it's hard to give answers that are both accurate and concise to some of these questions, without appending "in language ______" to them. In some languages, access control is a compiler feature and is actually strictly enforced. Objective-C has access control for instance variables, but not for messages, and the ivar access control can be circumvented via the runtime (to say nothing of -valueForKey:). "Private…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even so, most employers that we work with won't even consider job seekers who don't have this stuff down.
>won't even consider job seekers who don't have this stuff down That's not the point, it means different things to different programming languages, which means there is more than one correct answer unless you get more specific. Further, it's virtually irrelevant to Python programmers since the OO model there is "we're all consenting adults". Have what down? You haven't even stated a well-formed question.
Hence, you're seeing a somewhat skewed version of the developer population.
If so, you probably just weeded out a huge percentage of Java programmers.
Imagine if "What is an interface?" was the first question you were asked. That's so vague it's almost philosophical.
Finally, I'm really glad I've done enough Java programming to remember the answers to these questions. Apparently, if my work history had been a little different, I'd be unemployable.
Answers there would look something like this:
Explain public.
N/A
Explain private.
N/A
Explain protected.
N/A
What is an abstract class?
N/A
What is an interface?
Ah, we get to something shared... A list of functions that can be applied to an instance of a type without raising an error.
The times I've used Perl, Python, Javascript, and Common Lisp all do not relate to public/private/protected/abstract base class. They have simply not been required to do the job, and I'm unsure whether they even carry the concepts with them without building an extension into the language. I'm fairly sure a MOP could use it if you really wanted.
So while this test might be great for C++/Java/C# hiring... I don't even bother asking these questions when I'm on a Python/Bash/Perl hiring team. They don't relate.
The questions aren't interesting. They can be Googled, and I would be brutally tempted to think better of someone if they stalled and I heard keys being whacked as they found the answers on Wikipedia or StackOverflow.
But, you know, maybe OO teams need their OO FizzBuzz. I can totally appreciate that, and wish SuperCoders all the best :-)