3 ms·

I am not sure of your study of problems but you have spoken like techno-functional user. Finding a good translation surely is a big part but then getting things

I am not sure of your study of problems but you have spoken like techno-functional user. Finding a good translation surely is a big part but then getting things correct is also required. Writing couple of joins to get the correct data is fine but getting the correct join or data type or structure is also required. The difference being running a code for couple of hours vs in couple of minutes.

danieltillett 9y ago
I am not suggesting that the right data structure is not important, just that is not where the difficulty lies. I can solve problems that my far more CS knowledgable employees can't because I have a better understanding of the domain. My solutions are not always the most elegant, but they work (most of the time).
- anonemouse145 9y ago
  The CS industry at large rarely conducts interviews that land good employees. What HR does? Algorithm questions should be a jumping off point. All good programmers know that the first questions a great programmer really asks when handed one of these questions are more like "can I use the built-in" or (x library that solves the issue) or maybe "how fast does it need to be I know a slow perl solution to this" or even better- "where did this requirement come from maybe there's a better approach entirely that could save us dozens of hours and produce more maintainable code" or "can you tell me about this process that hands programmers disjointed arbitrary tasks I'm not sure I want to work in that environment". Heck, someone who first writes out the code for the automated test before tackling the algorithm is a great choice. If someone's first answer to a generic algorithm question is to perfectly produce a textbook answer, the interview has gone wrong in a number of places.
- thisisit 9y ago
  My point is on the elegance of a solution. As you said your solution works but that can be attributed to your domain knowledge. But the affect of your solution might be understated. We have people who write direct queries after much discussion with us. While we can't directly point them out, the queries tend to run for hours affecting other people's work and then we have to rework the whole thing all over again.

danieltillett 9y ago

I am not suggesting that the right data structure is not important, just that is not where the difficulty lies. I can solve problems that my far more CS knowledgable employees can't because I have a better understanding of the domain. My solutions are not always the most elegant, but they work (most of the time).

anonemouse145 9y ago
The CS industry at large rarely conducts interviews that land good employees. What HR does? Algorithm questions should be a jumping off point. All good programmers know that the first questions a great programmer really asks when handed one of these questions are more like "can I use the built-in" or (x library that solves the issue) or maybe "how fast does it need to be I know a slow perl solution to this" or even better- "where did this requirement come from maybe there's a better approach entirely that could save us dozens of hours and produce more maintainable code" or "can you tell me about this process that hands programmers disjointed arbitrary tasks I'm not sure I want to work in that environment". Heck, someone who first writes out the code for the automated test before tackling the algorithm is a great choice. If someone's first answer to a generic algorithm question is to perfectly produce a textbook answer, the interview has gone wrong in a number of places.
thisisit 9y ago
My point is on the elegance of a solution. As you said your solution works but that can be attributed to your domain knowledge. But the affect of your solution might be understated. We have people who write direct queries after much discussion with us. While we can't directly point them out, the queries tend to run for hours affecting other people's work and then we have to rework the whole thing all over again.