3 ms·
edit: I didn't even notice the "rails" until after I wrote this. My brain filled in "ruby". I agree that java vs rails is stupid. I love the compare/contrast s
by jghn 9y ago
edit: I didn't even notice the "rails" until after I wrote this. My brain filled in "ruby". I agree that java vs rails is stupid.
I love the compare/contrast style of questions between languages. I try to not phrase it as "pros and cons" however. What I'm looking to see is the breadth of their knowledge and what insights they've picked up from hard earned experience. Also, showing the ability to think critically about different tools demonstrates that they understand when a hammer is appropriate vs a screwdriver.
I don't care what they think is better or worse, I want them to show me that they've traveled the world, so to speak.
- denzil_correa 9y agoGenerally, I never interview about things "I know". I want to know how the candidate approached his/her project - the choices s/he to consider while designing the solution. It gives me far greater insight into the candidate's mind than merely asking "whiteboard questions".
- Clubber 9y agoIt's not completely stupid. My answer would be: If you need something up and running fast, but don't care about performance per instance, such as a marketing landing page use RoR. If you need something very performant per instance and are willing to pay for it, such as a enterprise application or large web site, use Java. If that's not an acceptable answer, the interviewer doesn't know what he's doing.
- jghn 9y agoThe "stupid" part is comparing Java to Rails, not Java to Ruby. IOW you're comparing a language to a web framework. I agree with everything you said.