4 ms·

"I’ve been working since the 90s and I never attempted to do FizzBuzz. Is it really relevant?" So, when stating "can't do FizzBuzz in interview" I think there

by Jun8 7y ago

"I’ve been working since the 90s and I never attempted to do FizzBuzz. Is it really relevant?" So, when stating "can't do FizzBuzz in interview" I think there are two meanings: (1) Candidate attempts to do it, writes some code in language X with some (many) syntax errors and some logic errors and (2) Cannot do anything at all, i.e. candidate there's no response and the onscreen cursor does not move (usually this is a phone interview). My experience with candidates I've seen is that the ratio of (1) to (2) is about equal! Depending on the number and the of errors, (1) could be worrisome but the issue that people generally bring up in discussions on FizzBuzz is the utter incredulity of (2). I'm mechanically challenged and have never changed a tire, yet , if asked to do so, will make some movements that are roughly aligned with the goal, albeit may be laughable to more knowledgeable people. Ditto for cooking a simple dish, e.g. spaghetti. I think this residual knowledge is acquired by osmosis through being around people (or watching TV) doing the task. So, the most unnerving aspect of (2) to me is that it shows that the candidate does not even has this residual knowledge about programming.

michaelbuckbee 7y ago
I think "roughly aligned with the goals" is ok - from having worked with some people trying to start out in software development the biggest hurdles are in trying to apply the knowledge to the problem at hand. That some people really struggle with properly defining the problem and what needs done in such a way that it's tractable. Highly recommend this video on "The Expert" which illustrates this beautifully - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg
mdorazio 7y ago
As a counterpoint, your real-world equivalent example is kind of bad. A normal person who had never changed a tire and got a flat would, as step #1, Google or YouTube "how to change a tire" and follow the steps. Or perhaps look in the owner's manual. Randomly rummaging around in your trunk and trying to puzzle out how to use a bottle jack and get the lug nuts off/on correctly is a poor way to go about it. Similarly, in real-world programming if you get to a requirement to do something you've never seen before, the first step most programmers I've worked with would take is looking up potential solutions that already exist. The problem, of course, is that if you're in the middle of an interview and someone throws a programming problem at you, your first instinct to go look up potential solutions would generally lose you the job opportunity. A better test of real-world skill needed would be to give them some variant of fizzbuzz code then ask them what it does, or put a bug in it and ask them to find the bug and fix it based on the expected output of the function.
heavenlyblue 7y ago
>> if asked to do so, will make some movements that are roughly aligned with the goal, albeit may be laughable to more knowledgeable people Yeah, and the sad thing is that you will probably end up trying to raise your car against one of the non-structural frames which will subsequently tear off a panel or two. What you are measuring here is the skill of speculating.

by Jun8 7y ago

michaelbuckbee 7y ago

I think "roughly aligned with the goals" is ok - from having worked with some people trying to start out in software development the biggest hurdles are in trying to apply the knowledge to the problem at hand. That some people really struggle with properly defining the problem and what needs done in such a way that it's tractable. Highly recommend this video on "The Expert" which illustrates this beautifully - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

mdorazio 7y ago

As a counterpoint, your real-world equivalent example is kind of bad. A normal person who had never changed a tire and got a flat would, as step #1, Google or YouTube "how to change a tire" and follow the steps. Or perhaps look in the owner's manual. Randomly rummaging around in your trunk and trying to puzzle out how to use a bottle jack and get the lug nuts off/on correctly is a poor way to go about it. Similarly, in real-world programming if you get to a requirement to do something you've never seen before, the first step most programmers I've worked with would take is looking up potential solutions that already exist. The problem, of course, is that if you're in the middle of an interview and someone throws a programming problem at you, your first instinct to go look up potential solutions would generally lose you the job opportunity. A better test of real-world skill needed would be to give them some variant of fizzbuzz code then ask them what it does, or put a bug in it and ask them to find the bug and fix it based on the expected output of the function.

heavenlyblue 7y ago

>> if asked to do so, will make some movements that are roughly aligned with the goal, albeit may be laughable to more knowledgeable people Yeah, and the sad thing is that you will probably end up trying to raise your car against one of the non-structural frames which will subsequently tear off a panel or two. What you are measuring here is the skill of speculating.