[StavrosK]

Sure, but it comes off as "I think FizzBuzz is some sort of significant problem, as attested to by my mention of it", which acts pretty negatively.

You wouldn't expect a carpenter to say "I can both screw and unscrew screws from wood". It's sort of a given if you have the slightest bit of domain knowledge.

[edanm]

I took it as a lighthearted, joking statement.

Besides, just the fact that someone knows about FizzBuzz is a good sign in my book (also the fact that they know about HN, but I digress).

[StavrosK]

Heh, I think the fact that they know HN is more of a testament to ability than FizzBuzz indeed :p

[mtogo]

You wouldn't expect a carpenter to say "I can both screw and unscrew screws from wood".

Given that a huge number of professional programmers can't do the programming equivelant of screwing and unscrewing screws, that actually does make a difference.

[StavrosK]

True though that may be, I don't think the OP's intention is to convince us that he's less than utterly incompetent...

[Cushman]

Depends who you're talking to, I think. Hip hackers on HN are going to laugh at you, but hiring managers? Maybe not.

[StavrosK]

Jeff himself said, rather horrified when people started posting solutions to FizzBuzz:

> FizzBuzz was presented as the lowest level of comprehension required to illustrate adequacy. There's no glory to be had in writing code that establishes a minimum level of competency. Even if you can write it in five different languages or in under 50 bytes of code.

> The whole point of the original article was to think about why we have to ask people to write FizzBuzz. The mechanical part of writing and solving FizzBuzz, however cleverly, is irrelevant. Any programmer who cares enough to read programming blogs is already far beyond such a simple problem. FizzBuzz isn't meant for us. It's the ones we can't reach-- the programmers who don't read anything-- that we're forced to give the FizzBuzz test to.

I think that mentioning it as a skill (unless it's in jest), seriously hurts anyone's chances at being taken seriously. Exactly like someone would be dubious if their carpenter said "I can definitely make that cabinet for you. Hell, I can screw and unscrew!"

[sliverstorm]

I didn't take it so much as a "skill" as a, "my lack of employment is not because I can't pass fuzz tests"

[georgieporgie]

it comes off as

I don't think it came off that way at all. He's stating that he can demonstrate a basic, fundamental grasp of code structure in several languages and types of languages, which is pretty good.

[StavrosK]

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I think the only thing easier than FizzBuzz is Hello World. I wouldn't advise anyone to mention they can write one in their resume.

[georgieporgie]

I don't have any reason to believe he put it on his resume.

As for complexity, FizzBuzz is nothing like Hello World. Hello World only shows that one knows how to make a program compile/interpret and display fixed output. FizzBuzz demonstrates the above, plus an understanding of looping, basic arithmetic operations, and how to create program flow from that. Like it or not, that covers most of the actual coding requirements of probably 90% of jobs out there. It shouldn't be a deciding factor in getting hired, but it's an excellent first step in weeding out those who shouldn't be considered.

[nivertech]

I recently interviewed a Ruby programmer, who was unable to write a Hello World in C, despite the fact he studied C and C++ in university.