|
|
|
|
|
by ctdonath
4817 days ago
|
|
By the time you're evaluating someone with FizzBuzz, they're trying to convince you they have training and have developed from "very junior" (to wit untrained). FizzBuzz is the kind of test which should be a pass/fail final exam question for a 6-week Beginning Programming course, not something any degreed entry-level candidate would have trouble with. Can they be trained? sure. But when applying for jobs, they're expected to already have training up to basic competency for the position. A restaurant shouldn't have to teach a prospective cook how to make a grilled cheese sandwich, an auto repair shop shouldn't have to teach a prospective mechanic how to change a tire, and a software house shouldn't have to teach a prospective programmer how to write FizzBuzz. If such training is in fact needed, then the higher education "industry" is broken to the point that businesses should just get kids straight out of high school and take 'em from there. |
|
The FizzBuzz question should really be "write me 3 versions of FizzBuzz, explain why they're different, and under what conditions would you use each over the others."
The fact that the FizzBuzz issue is a matter of whether the candidate can write it at all - and that so many interviewers don't view a "nope" answer as a full-stop red flag - indicates a baffling state of industry affairs.