3 ms·

The fizzbuzz test is not entirely about whether someone can do it. It's also about figuring out the style of the programmer. There's a surprising amount of flex

The fizzbuzz test is not entirely about whether someone can do it. It's also about figuring out the style of the programmer. There's a surprising amount of flexibility to fizzbuzz; how is user input handled? Do they use a linter? How are variables managed/named? There's a lot going on, and it can be gamed just like anything else on both ends. That said, the last time I had a fizzbuzz take-home test, it was infuriating -- my code is online.. what does fizzbuzz prove except to help make a company soc2 compliant?

new299 7y ago
I guess it depends how you use it. I started hearing about FizzBuzz in the context of "why can't programmers program" [1]. I.e. that many interview candidates can't solve this problem. It's also my experience interviewing programmers (outside SF) that most candidates can't solve simple FizzBuzz style questions. As a take-home test, I agree I can't really see the value in it. [1] https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/
- ryandrake 7y ago
  Back when I did phone screens, I went even simpler: Write a program that counts from one to ten, printing each number out followed by your name followed by a newline. Do not print the line for number 4. It’s astounding how many programming candidates can’t work their way through this.
  - james_s_tayler 7y ago
    Also astounding is the number of programmers who program over the phone. Approximately zero.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
DavidWoof 7y ago
No, a fizzbuzz test is entirely about whether somebody can do it. That's the definition of a fizzbuzz test. When you hear others talking about a fizzbuzz test, they're not talking about the specific algorithm, they're specifically talking about a simple single-function problem that should take no more than 5 or 10 minutes. If you're dealing with user input or linting, then that's not a fizzbuzz test. I'm not doubting that maybe somebody asked you to do something larger than that including the fizzbuzz problem, I'm just saying that nobody else here is talking about take-home problems when we talk about fizzbuzz.

new299 7y ago

I guess it depends how you use it. I started hearing about FizzBuzz in the context of "why can't programmers program" [1]. I.e. that many interview candidates can't solve this problem. It's also my experience interviewing programmers (outside SF) that most candidates can't solve simple FizzBuzz style questions. As a take-home test, I agree I can't really see the value in it. [1] https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/why-cant-programmers-program/

ryandrake 7y ago
Back when I did phone screens, I went even simpler: Write a program that counts from one to ten, printing each number out followed by your name followed by a newline. Do not print the line for number 4. It’s astounding how many programming candidates can’t work their way through this.
- james_s_tayler 7y ago
  Also astounding is the number of programmers who program over the phone. Approximately zero.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

DavidWoof 7y ago

No, a fizzbuzz test is entirely about whether somebody can do it. That's the definition of a fizzbuzz test. When you hear others talking about a fizzbuzz test, they're not talking about the specific algorithm, they're specifically talking about a simple single-function problem that should take no more than 5 or 10 minutes. If you're dealing with user input or linting, then that's not a fizzbuzz test. I'm not doubting that maybe somebody asked you to do something larger than that including the fizzbuzz problem, I'm just saying that nobody else here is talking about take-home problems when we talk about fizzbuzz.