4 ms·

The thing is, if you're interviewing and throwing away candidates because you're expecting knowledge of stuff that, for example, doesn't work in IE 6, or is bas

The thing is, if you're interviewing and throwing away candidates because you're expecting knowledge of stuff that, for example, doesn't work in IE 6, or is based on your specific way of writing Javascript code, you're just throwing away good candidates. (Also, coding standards are not subjective. Some ways of writing code are more productive than others. The idea that it's subjective is nice to believe, because then you can pretend that nobody is wrong.)

byoung2 12y ago
I would question anyone who cites IE6 as a reason for coding a certain way in 2015. IE6 hasn't been relevant for at least 5 years now. But if a candidate said that he was familiar with bind() but would avoid it for the sake of compatibility with IE6 that at least shows familiarity with it. Using your logic, it would be ok for a candidate to say he had never heard of transparent PNGs because IE6 doesn't support them.
- SamReidHughes 12y ago
  I'm citing it as a reason for somebody not being familiar with it. IE6 certainly was a restriction in some environments in the past five years or less. And that's on top of the reason that there's no good reason to use bind in what many people consider to be reasonably written code. Knowledge of these sorts of library features is a terrible proxy for actual ability to write good Javascript. There are better ways to test for that in a phone screen.
- jtheory 12y ago
  It's still relevant today, unfortunately, in some industries where upgrading is prohibitively expensive. E.g., you'd need to buy a new POS system, or paid millions to have custom-made medical software recertified (or re-written) to work on a newer browser, etc.. It's much rarer -- most places have bitten the bullet by now -- but I still see it (and IE7 is certainly still around).

4 ms·

The thing is, if you're interviewing and throwing away candidates because you're expecting knowledge of stuff that, for example, doesn't work in IE 6, or is bas

by SamReidHughes 12y ago

byoung2 12y ago
I would question anyone who cites IE6 as a reason for coding a certain way in 2015. IE6 hasn't been relevant for at least 5 years now. But if a candidate said that he was familiar with bind() but would avoid it for the sake of compatibility with IE6 that at least shows familiarity with it. Using your logic, it would be ok for a candidate to say he had never heard of transparent PNGs because IE6 doesn't support them.
- SamReidHughes 12y ago
  I'm citing it as a reason for somebody not being familiar with it. IE6 certainly was a restriction in some environments in the past five years or less. And that's on top of the reason that there's no good reason to use bind in what many people consider to be reasonably written code. Knowledge of these sorts of library features is a terrible proxy for actual ability to write good Javascript. There are better ways to test for that in a phone screen.
- jtheory 12y ago
  It's still relevant today, unfortunately, in some industries where upgrading is prohibitively expensive. E.g., you'd need to buy a new POS system, or paid millions to have custom-made medical software recertified (or re-written) to work on a newer browser, etc.. It's much rarer -- most places have bitten the bullet by now -- but I still see it (and IE7 is certainly still around).