3 ms·
I think this approach might backfire: If purpose of the question is to test the candidate's knowledge of common libraries, then it probably is way to easy to be
by IgorBog61650384 6y ago
I think this approach might backfire: If purpose of the question is to test the candidate's knowledge of common libraries, then it probably is way to easy to be indicative, this kind of knowledge should be tested for something the candidate can't find by googling for 5 minutes. If the purpose is to test algorithm design, its also way to basic.
- Someone 6y agoApparently, FizzBuzz (https://imranontech.com/2007/01/24/using-fizzbuzz-to-find-developers-who-grok-coding/ https://imranontech.com/2007/01/24/using-fizzbuzz-to-find-de.... A nice page about it: https://www.tomdalling.com/blog/software-design/fizzbuzz-in-too-much-detail/ https://www.tomdalling.com/blog/software-design/fizzbuzz-in-...) is a useful test to weed out bad programmers. If so, this can, too.
- fr2null 6y agoWhile most of the comments on the Twitter thread use fancy functions from common libraries, you should be able to solve this problem without the need for googling and without those fancy functions. While I agree that this is way to basic to test AD skills, if it's really true that there is a sizable percentage of people that is unable to solve this problem, this might be a good way to weed those out, before starting with the 'real' questions.