151–160 of 460 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
really? i have seen very few positions in europe offering more than 50-70k a year, and i looked at hundreds. that includes seniors.
I assume you haven't looked at Switzerland?
Interestingly, unlike many in this thread I would've avoided hiring this person based only on the code example. This code is almost unreadable to me, certainly to most on my team. I would request changes it if it was a PR going into production (ignoring that the problem itself is made up). The code I would've liked to see would be easy to read, easy to follow, and would make me understand the underlying rules that ma…
Then I realized how hard they are to debug once codebase looks like this, and any serious production code will get debugged to hell, no doubt there. Also implementing changes require same mindset, which is rare in teams generally, so its basically a technical debt right in creation.
KISS, the most important principle in any form of engineering is exact opposite of this. I've seen and experienced great success with it. I haven't seen that much success when ignored, apart from one man / tiny homogeneous team show.
Here's my attempt, if OP can read this: https://github.com/TZubiri/fizzbuzz2.0 Apologies to the employers that I uploaded it to Github, but I was trying to keep my green squares thingy streak. I didn't upload the requirements so that it's harder to google/scrape into an LLM. My first note is that, the quality of the code was very high, evidently the code worked and it did so in a manner that introducing changes eithe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
really? i have seen very few positions in europe offering more than 50-70k a year, and i looked at hundreds. that includes seniors.
I assume you haven't looked at Switzerland?
What a genuinely terrible interview. Seems like a great way to learn absolutely nothing about the candidate. I would have walked out half way through. These types of questions are very telling of an organization which is extremely insecure in its own abilities. For anyone who is a somewhat experienced programmer it is not hard to tell if someone else knows what he is talking about. You do not need to waste 45 minutes…
This rule alone would make me walk out: "New rules will be revealed one by one. The candidate should note them as there won’t be shown again" This feels more like a Squid Game parody than an interview. I interview people from all walks of life. I would definitely not have hired some of the best engineers I worked with if I was trying to be too clever and quirky when giving out requirements.
You buried your lede IMO. The interviewers had this cute game and when the developer didn't play by the planned rules (build up a monsterous collections of branching on top of a for loop) they were screwed. Issues:
* rules revealed one by one. Spec changes and is always incomplete, but you never even hear about changing spec that your existing solution already handles.
* artificially handicaping developers. This is the opposite you want; it's a bad smell if developers are not offloading to rock solid libraries and language features
* punishing creativity. You're getting a great view into how this person works and thinks; isn't that a primary purpose of all interviews?
* anti-lookup / matrix. Some of the most efficient solutions use this aprooach, or an inherient property of the desired state/input (data as code). This is super-common in game development; John Carmack would have failed this interview too.
What a genuinely terrible interview. Seems like a great way to learn absolutely nothing about the candidate. I would have walked out half way through. These types of questions are very telling of an organization which is extremely insecure in its own abilities. For anyone who is a somewhat experienced programmer it is not hard to tell if someone else knows what he is talking about. You do not need to waste 45 minutes…
This rule alone would make me walk out: "New rules will be revealed one by one. The candidate should note them as there won’t be shown again" This feels more like a Squid Game parody than an interview. I interview people from all walks of life. I would definitely not have hired some of the best engineers I worked with if I was trying to be too clever and quirky when giving out requirements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if an interviewer says "I don't think that will be a good idea" just take the hint that it won't be what the expect and change it. I'd like to underline this just in case the author reads the thread. He really does seem great and I wish all the best to him, but reading between the lines is a useful skill regardless of this specific situation. He says he doesn't speak English well, that might have played a role in t…
Good leadership starts with clearly communicating expectations. If your boss can not say "I want you to use this tool" or "use whatever you seem fit", but instead hints to you as to some possible drawbacks of certain tools he is bad at his job. There are multiple ways to read that suggestion. It can also be read as the interviewer saying he does not believe in the technical depth of the candidate, which can be taken…
It's not that the candidate is underqualified, it's that they demonstrated more hacking skill than programming skill in that interview. I feel like the rules about program length were mistaken for coding golf rules? A small company hiring a programmer isn't looking for super clever type system hacks, they're looking for someone to crank out code to solve problems fast. It's not readable or efficient to use the type c…
They WERE expecting a clever solution.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> if an interviewer says "I don't think that will be a good idea" just take the hint that it won't be what the expect and change it. I'd like to underline this just in case the author reads the thread. He really does seem great and I wish all the best to him, but reading between the lines is a useful skill regardless of this specific situation. He says he doesn't speak English well, that might have played a role in t…
Yeah, it's an English thing. A literal translation in Dutch would mean "explain yourself here", and if you'd change tack because of the question alone, it would seem like you really lack self-confidence. But after living in the UK for a bit, in the UK that is most likely an order.
That's just patently untrue. The literal translation is "ik denk niet dat dat een goed idee is" and the better translation would be "dat is niet de bedoeling".
If I got told in an interview "dat is niet de bedoeling" I'd be damn sure to rework my solution because they're clearly trying to coax me towards whatever they're looking for. And in a way it is actually a nice thing of them, because they could just say nothing and fail me out of that round of interviews.