|
|
|
|
|
|
by the_only_law
1683 days ago
|
|
|
I cost myself a position recently arguing about this. I had a first round interview that went well, and was given a take home and the problem was very simple, dead simple. In turn I tried to keep the code as simple as possible, with only necessary abstractions. The second interview was with an entirely different person who seemed displeased I didn’t bloat the solution with all sorts of enterprise patterns, dependencies and conventions. I was kinda backed into a wall and while attempting to explain my reasons I ended up in an argument with the interviewer and it was clear we did not see eye to eye. He would later challenge my ability to perform in a patronizing tone and I was sure the opportunity was dead It wasn’t the only thing that went wrong with that interview, but I feel that disagreement was the biggest killer. |
|
|
I always talked the talk and walked the walk for the interviews. I know people love Solid, design patterns, Dry, OOP, Restful, Clean Code, complicated architectures. So I am always willing to talk about these and even sprinkle the discussion with the most obscure design patterns they may never heard of.
Yes, I do consider some of these being fads or even detrimental to good software but my goal was to be employed, not to convince people that there is not only one True Way.