|
I wasn't expected to be productive for the first 3 months. The first week I had code in our mainline product.
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:44 |
|
|
ratbert90 posted:I wasn't expected to be productive for the first 3 months. The first week I had code in our mainline product. love 2 mainline code
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
leper khan posted:jfc if I wasn't working on anything for a year I'd probably just quit. probably wouldn't even make it that long on only garbage assignments. the way you phrase "not working on anything" it's like you can't imagine a system so large it would require more than a few days of study, or a product timeline longer than a month
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:the way you phrase "not working on anything" it's like you can't imagine a system so large it would require more than a few days of study, or a product timeline longer than a month yeah like it's easy to commit code, it's hard to go from zero to grokking the full architecture and design of a big system, it takes a while, you will not ever be productive right away on a nontrivial thing
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
our last fresh hires were productive inside of a few weeks but, more than six months later, will freely admit that they don't understand the whole system
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
I applied for a job that was like a perfect match for my skills and experience and when I went back to the website to look at it they removed the posting the next day I'd guess they lost budget for the position but forgot to remove it from the hr system until they saw me use it
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:56
|
|
|
it should not be necessary to grok the full architecture and design of a big system before productively committing code
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:01
|
|
|
it shouldn't but it inevitably will
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:02
|
|
|
i've been productive on this project for four months now but only learned about a very significant part of the arch for it last week
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
week three on the new job and I still haven't done any real work currently watching a help desk ticket to get me log in access to a system bounce around for the third straight day
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
JawnV6 posted:the way you phrase "not working on anything" it's like you can't imagine a system so large it would require more than a few days of study, or a product timeline longer than a month I've worked on large code bases. I would still feel stifled if I was only given babby's first task stuff 6-12 months in. qntm posted:it should not be necessary to grok the full architecture and design of a big system before productively committing code
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
qntm posted:it should not be necessary to grok the full architecture and design of a big system before productively committing code we're talking about net productivity and shipping. sure you can submit a small bug fix, but you're still leaning on the team around you for parts of the system you haven't internalized. sure you can push code to a repo, the fact that it won't ship until months later is more about the kind of work that any org disfunction or personal failure
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
pretty weird for me to see all this talk about being productive in x weeks or months. in academia you can quite easily have an entire successful career without ever really getting up to speed or doing anything useful
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
leper khan posted:jfc if I wasn't working on anything for a year I'd probably just quit. probably wouldn't even make it that long on only garbage assignments. I don't think I did anything productive in my first year at any job. I worked on stuff but it was all small and with help from other people. I certainly didn't fully own any big part of a project until a year in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:pretty weird for me to see all this talk about being productive in x weeks or months. in academia you can quite easily have an entire successful career without ever really getting up to speed or doing anything useful as near as i can tell this holds true for industry as well, i think we're talking about mean-time or median-time or maybe best-case time
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 21:09
|
|
|
I have an interview tomorrow and I definitely don't have any clothes to interview in.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:I have an interview tomorrow and I definitely don't have any clothes to interview in. walk in naked and say it's alpha to dress as caveman did and the vulnerability to attack spikes ur adrenaline and makes you a 10x dev naked and a dev
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:19
|
|
|
6 months is reasonable for an apprenticeship position before you can start doing more in-depth activities and a year or more before you can move on to journeyman it's quite telling that computer touching jobs are fundamentally the same whether you start "working" in the first week or after a year
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:20
|
|
|
qntm posted:it should not be necessary to grok the full architecture and design of a big system before productively committing code yeah well im a system analyst so 'chief thing grokker' is kinda my title
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:59
|
|
|
maniacdevnull posted:yeah well im a system analyst so 'chief thing grokker' is kinda my title Lmao if this isn't what you are resume says
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
grok me daddy
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:16
|
|
|
first onsite interview of the season scheduled. time to brush up on those data structures and algorithms
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
my linked in used to say that my title was 'computer whisperer' I get far fewer profile views now that I've changed it to something professional
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
Just had a candidate in today that we're going to have to pass on. One of my team members ran into her at a career fair, and was really impressed. Said team member's husband was also there and was equally impressed. She nailed every question on the programming test, had a great resume, had a great phone screen, and when we had her in today, she just bombed on the white-boarding. I hate doing white-boarding and I gave her what I thought was an easy question, especially since it was remarkably similar to a question she had on the programming test. I figured I was going to be spending my time seeing if they could come up with the optimal solution. She struggled the entire way through, and it was across the board, including not having a return parameter on her method (the question was a 'return x from y' type question). She didn't ask enough questions while working, as I was willing to practically walk her through it if she'd ask the right questions. I was really hoping I was just being overly-critical as she was a graduating senior, but afterwards me and the other two interviewers (including my team member who first met her) agreed it was bad, and were all disappointed because we wanted her to ace it. I'm wondering now if she had someone review their programming test before turning it in because it was too perfect compared to what she did today. It could have also been nerves, and that makes me feel awful, but she did nothing to save herself out there. Practice white-boarding. Programming Interviews Exposed is a great book. Unless you're dealing with a real dick of an interviewer, we're more than willing to guide you if you ask the right questions. Colleges should also do a better job prepping CS majors for interviews.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
leper khan posted:jfc if I wasn't working on anything for a year I'd probably just quit. probably wouldn't even make it that long on only garbage assignments. i'm not saying you won't be working on anything, just that you won't be self-sufficient. ie: you don't know what their code standards are, you don't know how their common libraries are organized/accessed, you don't know which department or persons are responsible for which systems, etc. stuff like that
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:53
|
|
|
TerminalRaptor posted:Just had a candidate in today that we're going to have to pass on. or maybe you're expecting her to know the implicit expectations of a whiteboard question which is unreasonable considering that this was probably her first one ever? maybe your interview process is broken- not her?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
if you place strict expectations that your candidates be super well prepared for your arbitrary interview process guess who you're going to end up hiring?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:00
|
|
|
MALE SHOEGAZE posted:my linked in used to say that my title was 'computer whisperer' I used to have a funny linkedin title and it lead to some really fantastic recruiter emails like "Hey 69, How are you enjoying your Computer role at Whisperer?" i.e.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
TerminalRaptor posted:including not having a return parameter on her method lmao I mean, I have flunked people who loving melted down in whiteboard interviews, because yeah I do kinda want to hire people that have a modicum of pulling their poo poo together to talk through a problem but still, lmao
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:07
|
|
|
forgetting to write return on the white board is an automatic fail
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:26
|
|
|
any decent programmer should be able to write a simple function on a whiteboard in a language they know well. yes, it is challenging to write in a whiteboard, and you shouldn't be doing something that takes a ton of code or a bunch of convoluted logic, it should be very straight forward. implement atoi(), for example, without any library functions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
BONGHITZ posted:forgetting to write return on the white board is an automatic fail nope. coding on a whiteboard under pressure is hard and humans make dumb mistakes. I try to find out if it's because they don't understand how to program or because they just didn't notice. usually you can tell by the rest of their code.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:37
|
|
|
TerminalRaptor posted:Just had a candidate in today that we're going to have to pass on. cool, you should hire them anyways
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
I've enjoyed coding on a laptop in interviews far more than a whiteboard. doubly so for coding on /my/ laptop. I've also prefer going over projects or soft stuff instead of doing over again essentially what I already did during phone calls. The type of problem I'm going to solve in the timeframe available for a whiteboard session aren't that interesting. Especially when factoring in the amount of time it takes just to write on a whiteboard. Best pro tip for whiteboard interviews is to bring your own thinner pens though. You'll write a bit faster with them and take up less space.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:45
|
|
|
VOTE YES ON 69 posted:lmao that was just it. I could work with nervousness and making stupid mistakes, but I couldn't get her to show me that she knew what she was doing, at all We started giving really obvious hints and she would run in the opposite direction with them. "What's the number of times you have to walk through the string to find the result?" "oh once!" *oh good she gets it* *watches her immediately write a method to walk through the string 256 times. * Rex-Goliath posted:if you place strict expectations that your candidates be super well prepared for your arbitrary interview process guess who you're going to end up hiring? I hate doing whiteboarding; I am extremely sympathetic . There was no strict expectation. Talk the problem out with us. I'll walk you through it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:48
|
|
|
The Management posted:any decent programmer should be able to write a simple function on a whiteboard in a language they know well. yes, it is challenging to write in a whiteboard, and you shouldn't be doing something that takes a ton of code or a bunch of convoluted logic, it should be very straight forward. no.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:56
|
|
|
i will never ask candidates to write code on a whiteboard. not only because high-pressure whiteboarding is a terrible approximation of real development work, but more importantly because the entire style of quiz-question interviewing is bankrupt and useless
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 04:14
|
|
|
JewKiller 3000 posted:i will never ask candidates to write code on a whiteboard. not only because high-pressure whiteboarding is a terrible approximation of real development work, but more importantly because the entire style of quiz-question interviewing is bankrupt and useless quiz questions are dumb and bad. ask questions that are simple, have no trick to them, and demonstrate programming proficiency.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
that was almost fishmech-like, how you addressed the assumed implication of a tiny part of my post, rather than the actual point therein i don't care if your quiz is "fair", i'm saying your entire methodology of interviewing is wrong
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 04:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:44 |
|
|
JewKiller 3000 posted:that was almost fishmech-like, how you addressed the assumed implication of a tiny part of my post, rather than the actual point therein okay, let me address your main point: writing on a whiteboard is a communication and presentation exercise. the point is to convey how you approach problems and reason about them and if you can explain that to the interviewer. it is a discussion. the resulting code is a collaboration derived from the interviewee gathering requirements and feedback from on their approach. if I just wanted them to bang out something, it would be much faster on keyboard and it would also tell me very little about them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 05:08
|
|