gaylemcd

15 ms·

91.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Your assumptions are false. It is actually more profitable for me if I say that these algorithm tests are BS and completely study-able, and even the worst engineer can pass them. That easily translates into "here! buy my book and eve
92.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
So, you're a good developer who is smart and passed the interviews with some studying. That's exactly how it's supposed to work :). You're right that the problems that some up in interviews typically aren't real lif
93.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
> A small company is less likely to have sufficient appropriate work to allocate. Maybe so. But this isn't just any random small company. This is a specific 50-person company.
94.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
As the author of said book who has coached MANY people, I can assure you that many - heck, most developers - could not pass a Google interview regardless of how much they prepared. They'll get better with preparation, but it doesn&#x
95.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
I'm sure there is periodic work that you could tear off that fits the description of tedious and simple. That doesn't mean you'd want this particular person. Are you going to have him be a traveling coder, hoping in on only t
96.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Eh... it depends. You could have a question that can really only be solved optimally one way but that still provides adequate room to demonstrate problem-solving skills (even without knowing the "slick trick"). Such a question cou
97.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Then it's good that Google doesn't really ask logic puzzles. (That link to Google questions is full of fake questions. Just link bait.)
98.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
If you program, you are a programmer. By definition. I suspect what you're really asking is: why do so many companies thinking programming == solving puzzles? The answer is that: (1) Based on what you're defining as a puzzle, they
99.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
FYI (not really relevant for your post, but useful for people to know) - Gender is the protected class, not women. This means that it's illegal to use gender as a factor in employment, barring very strict standards of when somethin
100.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Then focus on this situation. Don't create new ones. Do you think it's reasonable to listen to a talk when someone is discusses, in technical details, big O, binary trees, graph algorithms, coding, system design, object oriented
101.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
http://xkcd.com/386/
102.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
So you're imagining a totally different situation and then saying that, in that situation, it might be reasonable to call me "not a programmer." I really fail to see your point. It sounds like you're trying to do this to
103.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
But, as I've said repeatedly, the comment wasn't about what I'm currently doing. Oh, and by the way -- still write a ton of code.
104.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
What's frustrating is the continuous straw mans. People are creating new situations, saying that those situations wouldn't be sexist, and therefore using that to prove that I'm inappropriately assuming sexism. Straw man. Ther
105.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Yes, that's fair. If you define "programmer" strictly as someone who currently holds a job title of "software developer", then sure, I'm not a programmer. Nor is, by that definition, a technical founder who&#
106.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
> I'm arguing that when a person who advertises themselves online as being in HR and gives talks about HR, it's plausible that people might perceive them as being in HR for non-sexist reasons. But again, the situation isn'
107.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
I'm not even a recruiter.
108.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Um, actually, this is what the highlighted post said: "when you 'talk about' code for an hour and still ppl think you're a recruiter, that's not about gender - that's about your tech skill: people don't th
109.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Your analogy is strange. You realize I have never worked as a recruiter, right? This is the second time you've referred to me as a recruiter. I do things in the intersection of interviewing and technology space, yes, but I've neve
110.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Oh, I'm sure I get mistake for a recruiter more than the average female engineer. That's not really the point. The point is that gender adds difficulty in establishing technical credibility. A different female programmer might hav
111.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
The talk covered binary trees, breadth first search, dynamic programming, etc. It wasn't focused on fluffy topics. It'd be pretty unlikely to hear a recruiter talk at such a technical level.
112.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
It's hardly rife with non-programming authors. Elements of Programming Interviews: authors include an algorithms professor, a software engineer, and an engineer/CTO. Programming Interviews Exposed: authors include software enginee
113.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
No, they're actually not focused on programming interviews. Those sorts of puzzles aren't asked in programming interviews.
114.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Sure. And then if someone's talking about binary trees, dynamic programming, depth first search, object oriented programming, don't you think you'd conclude "was or used to be a programmer"? Again THIS was the examp
115.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
... but that wasn't the situation described. This isn't about someone going to my webpage - or to a particular subpage - and concluding "recruiter". This is about someone talking to me AFTER A TALK ABOUT CODING and start
116.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
The example referenced is actually about someone asking "So when you were a recruiter at Google, ..." This is after a talk I gave on coding that covered data structures, algorithms, etc. If someone refers to be as an author now ,
117.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
If you read just that, okay fine. But if you're going to the front page of the website, you'd also see PROGRAMMER there. (Way to, by the way, cherry pick examples. Why not use this page? http://www.gayle.com/projec
118.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
And his book isn't on programming interviews.
119.
by gaylemcd 12y ago
Love the designs and approach!
120.
by gaylemcd 13y ago
This is awesome. Always a fan of people open sourcing cool technology like this!

More ›