Makes everything sound so mechanical and boring. Do they want normal people or some bot like creature that they can just assign numbers in a matrix? Depressing.
Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
11–20 of 51 posts
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#12Makes everything sound so mechanical and boring. Do they want normal people or some bot like creature that they can just assign numbers in a matrix? Depressing.
Robots that achieve OKRs.
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#13It would be a full time job to just do all the things on the far right.
There should be some interpersonal stuff on here. Met plenty of devs who limit themselves by being all "I'm too busy to be interrupted to help others"
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#14highest level in version control: "Has tried out Bzr/Mercurial/Darcs/Git" this page must be dated! I wonder how many other cells contain errors as well...
the IDE section is a bit dated. as a hiring manager, my belief is that IDEs are good enough (and even have collab features that are good in work-at-home-epoch) that it's not an unreasonable to never use/never have used vi/vim/emacs. If you're doing server administration, not being able to use vi is unacceptable; but these days everything is deployed by container and logging into raw linux systems is not really a thin…
> logging into raw linux systems is not really a thing
Just like dog fighting and guns weren't a thing before the Vietnam war ... but then they were, PHB.
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#15I remember seeing this matrix back in 2008: https://weblogs.asp.net/sjoseph/programmer-competency-matrix
That explains git being at the highest level.
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#16ITT: How to hire formulaic robots and reduce an entire profession to paint by numbers. This is really no different to current hiring though. In that you force people to learn arcane algorithm skills they will likely never use at any software company and you end up with entire books written on 'cracking the interview' over being a good engineer. The best companies I've ever seen actually looked at the work I had done enough to assess what kind of skills I had. But hiring is about being lazy. Good luck finding many companies who will actually treat you like an adult these days.
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
the IDE section is a bit dated. as a hiring manager, my belief is that IDEs are good enough (and even have collab features that are good in work-at-home-epoch) that it's not an unreasonable to never use/never have used vi/vim/emacs. If you're doing server administration, not being able to use vi is unacceptable; but these days everything is deployed by container and logging into raw linux systems is not really a thin…
Is nano really That Bad? It's always been good enough for my needs, and in the cases where it's not I generally hop on Sublime or vscode, make the changes I want to make, then paste it into my term.
It isn't, but frequently the default editor is set to vim. That said I would question the judgement of anyone that judges you based on your favored editor.
Except emacs, those folks will burn in hell.
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#18Well that was a very nice ego boost. Glad to see I’d be considered a great hire by a script that can match my CV to this matrix.
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#19[deleted]
Re: Programmer's Competency Matrix for SDE hiring parameters (2008)
#20A lot of dismissive complaints that boils to "this is objectifying programmers", and yes I get it. But now I'm on the other side (VP, but still coding), and actively recruiting, I realized some things taken for granted from myself and my good engineers, are still missing from a large number of candidates I've interviewed so far.
I usually ask the candidate for a live coding test over zoom. "Here's what you need to code, please share your screen while you're doing it so I can see how you work. You're free to google, of course, because that what we all do at work. The guy who wrote the quiz did it in 5min, I did it in 10. I give you 20 just in case. Please start now."
Then I watch them code. After that, we discuss their approach. But usually the second step never happened, because as soon as the timer stops and I see their code, the code (and how they're writing it) usually tells everything.