4 ms·
Some people that score well on interview tests are the worst fuckuppited programmers you'd never want to work with. And some who blow it are a pleasure to work
by KevinMS 18y ago
Some people that score well on interview tests are the worst fuckuppited programmers you'd never want to work with. And some who blow it are a pleasure to work with.
Those little tests don't account for documentation, architecture, scalability, readability, refactoring, etc. I don't give a damn if somebody can't come up with some little algorithm during the pressure of a test that could have easily just googled for, and also what is the best practices for that algorithm.
You are probably somebody new to the industry.
- smanek 18y agoLike I said, simple tests always have false positives. Of course a lot of poor coders can do fizz buzz. But, if you can't code fizz buzz in under five minutes, I guarantee you are a bad coder. It's a simple way to eliminate half your applicants. Sounds good to me.
- silencio 18y agoThat's exactly how I feel. Fizzbuzz and the SAT alike are to me just filling some very limited uses where they would come in handy - like if you ever DID ask fizzbuzz from an interviewee you'd at most be able to weed out people who don't know what the heck they're talking about, like some moron applying for a Java position that knows no Java. But to me the difference is that the SAT is like fizzbuzz applied to everyone regardless...if you had an interviewee that you knew in every way that fizzbuzz would be a waste of time (even that tiny amount of time) because they've proved themselves in some other way, you wouldn't ask. That's pretty much all I'm wanting. Some things are just not worth the effort because there's plenty else to see who they are and what they are capable of doing.