The phrase that came to my mind was "wildly disproportionate straw man", but, yeah. I'm mildly sympathetic to the author's point -- there certainly exists a su

The phrase that came to my mind was "wildly disproportionate straw man", but, yeah. I'm mildly sympathetic to the author's point -- there certainly exists a subset of developers who are more interested in bashing other peoples' code because it's not properly buzzword-compliant / in the wrong language / the wrong framework / uses the wrong whitespace formatting / does or does not include semicolons, than in evaluating it on the actual merits. (Though I suspect other industries also have their fair share of pedants and egotists.) Maybe I'm misreading but it seems the criticism the author cites was in the context of job interviews, which isn't exactly the right place to be looking for mentorship or supportive "A for effort" type feedback. It also seems like she isn't differentiating between critique of the code and critique of the coder. (To be fair plenty of people have a hard time keeping these separate, whether on the giving or on the receiving end.) The point of asking "is it responsive?" is -- or at least should be -- "responsive is important, maybe you should do something about that", not "I am unimpressed and you are a bad person who should feel bad."