3 ms·
As a software developer, I spend much, much more time reading code, trying to understand code, looking for bugs in code, and tweaking existing code, than I do w
by newfocogi 7y ago
As a software developer, I spend much, much more time reading code, trying to understand code, looking for bugs in code, and tweaking existing code, than I do writing totally new software applications. Although I agree it is surprising that many people can't reason through fizzbuzz, it is very possible to make valuable contribution to a code base in a language that you don't have the syntax for the "main" function memorized.
- stormbeard 7y agoIt’s definitely possible to make some other contribution, but not as a “programmer”. I can’t imagine giving a task to someone who can’t construct a basic for loop and a conditional statement.
- matwood 7y agoAt this point, coding is the easy part for many applications[1]. Developers end up spending much more time trying to understand what it is they are being tasked to build by either understanding the business or clarifying requirements. [1] I know us developers like to spend an enormous amount of time making things super complicated with fad tech, but we know a lot of it is not required.
- blunte 7y agoThis would be a fascinating, probably more reliable way to test someone: ask them to explain in as much detail as possible what a code sample did - what problem it appeared to be solving, and what edge cases it attempted to handle as well as perhaps some it would have failed to handle. If you provide them a good sample, the function names and behaviors should give a really good sense of direction to the candidate, and the harder questions would be answered by the details of the code.