5 ms·
Having been on both sides the interview process and going through hundreds of candidates, I agree that a code solving problem is a valuable gauge for the techni
by tvjunky 14y ago
Having been on both sides the interview process and going through hundreds of candidates, I agree that a code solving problem is a valuable gauge for the technical acumen of the candidate. In fact the best experiences I have had on both sides of the table have had a well thought out coding element included. The better ones had a more real world requirement and aren't so puzzle like (yes FizzBuzz is pretty simplistic, but it’s still a puzzle).
The biggest issue I see with this approach is the “On Paper” (white board applies as well) code. This is an unrealistic expectation. Unless you’re writing all your code on paper and this is a basic skill for your process, you've already added a factor that may push a normally fine developer out.
If language is unimportant, then process should be as well. Let the developer solve the problem in the best way they can, even if they do ‘Google’ it. You can use the amount of ‘googleing’ as another factor to evaluate.
- dean 14y agoI agree, let them use a computer, however I would just yank out the ethernet cable. I don't want to see how well someone can Google.
- tvjunky 14y agoI see the point. Still you're not testing how the candidate works. No one knows everything about everything. We are looking for the right team member to solve business problems, full stop. Shipped code always wins over the perfect algorithm sketched on the whiteboard.
- jlgreco 14y agoThink of it more as "testing how they don't work." A computer without google ensures that, however they may work, "google it" is not their only method. I don't want to hire somebody that can only "ship" with google.
- tvjunky 14y agoI still see your point. However, how do you solve a problem if you just don't know something? To me, a big factor in this test is, did they finish and does it work? Lets say they understand that Modulo would be the way to go but they are unsure of the syntax. Where would they find the answer? Or do we say, sorry you're out...you must memorize everything?
- jlgreco 14y agoBeing able to look up information on demand is an important skill, but that is not what is being tested by FizzBuzz. Furthermore, if it is a skill that needs to be exercised while attempting FizzBuzz, that is a disqualifier. 'FizzBuzz without Google' doesn't mean the candidate is expected to have memorized everything. Just a very minimal baseline. You can always test Google-skills separately, if you think it is in doubt.
- henrikschroder 14y agoI have to protest, Fizzbuzz is not a puzzle! There's no trick! The entire algorithm is given by the problem description! If you allow people to google it, you allow copy-paste-coders to pass the test, and you don't want that. Solving it requires a loop, some conditionals, and some print statements. If you can't write that from scratch, then you can't program. At all. Also, writing code or pseudo-code on a whiteboard is something we do pretty often at work, I don't think it's an unrealistic demand that your coworkers should be able to join in on such a discussion.