> Come on, naming is table stakes. Every interviewer seems to have their own idiosyncratic version of what they consider "table stakes". So table stakes ends u

> Come on, naming is table stakes. Every interviewer seems to have their own idiosyncratic version of what they consider "table stakes". So table stakes ends up being everything and nothing. > I can completely imagine a company rejecting a candidate because they didn’t care about naming. Didn't "care" about naming, or didn't focus on naming in some little throwaway sample code for a job interview?