Oldie Programming: Career Advice, Questions, Change of Directions

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > Oldie Programming: Career Advice, Questions, Change of Directions

«‹›575 »

apseudonym: Feb 25, 2011

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

Something else that may be working against you is simply that I'd guess 90+% of interviewees get rejected out of hand. I know at Google the policy is that if even one interviewer doesn't like you, then that's a no (but please try again in 6 months or a year). And interviewers will tend to err on the side of saying no if they're on the fence, because that means maintaining the status quo and that feels safe. So basically you have to wow absolutely everyone in order to pass.

That's not the policy at Google, at least not for the last 4 years I've been interviewing, you can get hired with an interviewer giving a strong negative -- but it's pretty uncommon to get a strong negative while everyone else is glowing.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 20:23

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 22:47

New Yorp New Yorp: Jul 18, 2003; Only in Kenya.; Pillbug

Volguus posted:

So this is exhibit A of why the interviewing process is so hosed up in software. "You have to have experience with technology X, version 1.2.3 otherwise you're not even invited to the interview". And you, Keetron, are not alone in this approach. Almost everyone does the same thing.
So, what is one to do to get experience with technology X? Well, there are a few options:

Work at home in your spare time. Experiment with various technologies, then maybe bring some at work. Either way, you can list that on your resume and maybe have an intelligent conversation about it.

Don't work at home, but instead try everything at work. Of course, before you know it you will have to maintain a Frankenstein of an application, with non-sensical libraries and frameworks mishmash-ed together. NoSQL, with React+ Spring boot and docker, on top of Mongo and 100 microservices. All to manage a list of employees. And this is what we see so often out there in the wild.

Don't work at home, don't work at work, and wither away. Hope that you will become (somehow) irreplaceable. 'Cause nobody will hire you since you don't have 10 years experience in a 5 year old technology.

You can also get into consulting. If you get the right kind of gig, you can bounce around from client to client and learn new stuff on their dime, while pretending to already be an expert at it.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 20:24

Volguus: Mar 3, 2009

New Yorp New Yorp posted:

You can also get into consulting. If you get the right kind of gig, you can bounce around from client to client and learn new stuff on their dime, while pretending to already be an expert at it.

Yeah, that's the best of both worlds: make the franekestein application, run away before it explodes, list poo poo on your resume, all on company time/dime.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 20:27

TooMuchAbstraction: Oct 14, 2012; I spent four years making
Waves of Steel
Hell yes I'm going to turn my avatar into an ad for it.; Fun Shoe

apseudonym posted:

That's not the policy at Google, at least not for the last 4 years I've been interviewing, you can get hired with an interviewer giving a strong negative -- but it's pretty uncommon to get a strong negative while everyone else is glowing.

Hm, maybe it depends on the department or something then. :shrug:

# ? Jun 28, 2018 20:33

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

apseudonym posted:

Can you roughly reproduce your code here?

I know there are things I can change and some of the method calls are likely off (I've been working with Scala lately but still don't feel strong enough to choose it over Java) but this is roughly what I produced during the interview:

code:

public boolean pyramidWord(String w) {
  HashMap<Character, Integer> charCount = new HashMap();

  for(Character c: w.toCharArray()) {
    if (!charCount.contains(c)) {
      map.put(c, 1);
    } else {
      map.put(c, charCount.get(c)++);
    }
  }

    //this is something i hosed up, using word length not map length
    boolean[] found = new boolean[w.length]
    for(Map.Entry<K,V> entry : charCount){
        if(found[entry.value()] = true) return false;
        found[entry.value()] = true;
    }

    //this is when i realized word was the wrong thing to count on
    for(int i = 0; i < charCount.length; i++){
      if(found[i] == false) return false;
    }

    return true;
  }

# ? Jun 28, 2018 20:44

apseudonym: Feb 25, 2011

Good Will Hrunting posted:

code:

public boolean pyramidWord(String w) {
  HashMap<Character, Integer> charCount = new HashMap();

  for(Character c: w.toCharArray()) {
    if (!charCount.contains(c)) {
      map.put(c, 1);
    } else {
      map.put(c, charCount.get(c)++);
    }
  }

    //this is something i hosed up, using word length not map length
    boolean[] found = new boolean[w.length]
    for(Map.Entry<K,V> entry : charCount){
    if(found[entry.value()] = true)    return false;
        found[entry.value()] = true;
    }

    //this is when i realized word was the wrong thing to count on
    for(int i = 0; i < charCount.length; i++){
      if(found[i] == false) return false;
    }

    return true;
  }

This doesn't seem to match the problem you described, fwiw.

I'm not sure if "if(found[entry.value()] = true)" is a translation error(that part of your code doesn't make sense), but you shouldnt need a final loop as you can return early.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 20:59

mrmcd: Feb 22, 2003; Pictured: The only good cop (a fictional one).

TooMuchAbstraction posted:

Hm, maybe it depends on the department or something then.

He's right though. If one person is extremely negative while everyone else is positive the hiring committee usually tries to dig into the feedback and figure out why, including how much the interviewer deviated from peers in past interviews.

HC ultimately has the biggest influence by far, there's no "one person didn't like you automatic fail" rule.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:00

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

apseudonym posted:

This doesn't seem to match the problem you described, fwiw.

What? Sure it does. Maybe I explained it poorly but let's use "banana" as an example:

First for loop counts # of appearances per character in the string: (b -> 1, a -> 3, n -> 2)

Second for loop flags an array using the array index as the value to store so my array found after that loop looks like [true, true, true]. The found[entry.getValue() == true] is checking whether this specific count has already been flagged, which denotes a failure (because we can only have 1 of each unique count).

While I was writing code I thought we'd need that third for loop to look for gaps in that constraint. You are correct in that the last loop is not necessary. If you see an index that is greater than the map's size, we can terminate. I couldn't say that with certainty as I was wrapping up my solution but realized afterwards.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:09

Jose Valasquez: Apr 8, 2005

Good Will Hrunting posted:

I know there are things I can change and some of the method calls are likely off (I've been working with Scala lately but still don't feel strong enough to choose it over Java) but this is roughly what I produced during the interview:
code:

I don't think this line works.

code:

map.put(c, charCount.get(c)++);

The ++ operator returns the current value before incrementing, so you're always setting the value to 1++ which is 1.

code:

    boolean[] found = new boolean[w.length]
    for(Map.Entry<K,V> entry : charCount){
        if(found[entry.value()] = true) return false;
        found[entry.value()] = true;
    }

If the question was about exactly 1 of any letter, exactly 2 of any letter, exactly 3 of any letter, etc. then I think this is fine? That wasn't how I understood the problem at first but upon rereading it maybe that's what it was.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:11

Jose Valasquez: Apr 8, 2005

mrmcd posted:

He's right though. If one person is extremely negative while everyone else is positive the hiring committee usually tries to dig into the feedback and figure out why, including how much the interviewer deviated from peers in past interviews.

HC ultimately has the biggest influence by far, there's no "one person didn't like you automatic fail" rule.

I read this on memegen today so it is probably true :v:

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:12

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

Jose Valasquez posted:

If the question was about exactly 1 of any letter, exactly 2 of any letter, exactly 3 of any letter, etc. then I think this is fine? That wasn't how I understood the problem at first but upon rereading it maybe that's what it was.

Yes, that was the problem.

Also yeah, I'm sure there were other bugs too. This was the third problem I was tackling in the span of just over 50 minutes in a notepad with no syntax highlighting or anything, my brain was absolutely fried. I didn't have much time to review what I had written at all, or like, actually think about it besides feeling like I was racing a clock.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:13

Jose Valasquez: Apr 8, 2005

Good Will Hrunting posted:

Yes, that was the problem.

Also yeah, I'm sure there were other bugs too. This was the third problem I was tackling in the span of just over 50 minutes in a notepad with no syntax highlighting or anything, my brain was absolutely fried.

If I was the interviewer I wouldn't take off much credit for the ++ thing personally, but I'm also not an interviewer so :shrug:

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:15

apseudonym: Feb 25, 2011

Good Will Hrunting posted:

What? Sure it does. Maybe I explained it poorly but let's use "banana" as an example:

First for loop counts # of appearances per character in the string: (b -> 1, a -> 3, n -> 2)

Second for loop flags an array using the array index as the value to store so my array found after that loop looks like [true, true, true]. The found[entry.getValue() == true] is checking whether this specific count has already been flagged, which denotes a failure (because we can only have 1 of each unique count).

While I was writing code I thought we'd need that third for loop to look for gaps in that constraint. You are correct in that the last loop is not necessary. If you see an index that is greater than the map's size, we can terminate. I couldn't say that with certainty as I was wrapping up my solution but realized afterwards.

Alright, that makes more sense. As a nit please don't do == true and == false, it's minor but looks super amateurish.

Your array size is incorrect either way, consider "aaaaaa", if you use the size of the map you'll try and access found[6], which is out of bounds. You'd have to use the max count.

E: and other things people pointed out

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:21

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

So basically I am expected to come up with a flawless solution with zero bugs that I have the time to go through and test in the constraints of 30 minutes? I mean sure, it's not a particularly hard problem, but that still seems unrealistic to me and once again beyond the whole "we want to see how you solve a problem" that people said these interviews were about. If I had time, I would have stepped through and seen most of the mistakes I made pretty quickly. But I didn't have time. So am I supposed to code... faster?

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:28

Knockknees: Dec 21, 2004; sprung out fully formed

My new workplace in Chicago is looking for a full stack senior developer with experience in things like rails, react, and/or elixir. I don't want to post too many identifiable details, but if you're interested PM me and I can send you the link to the job description and tell you more about it.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:31

apseudonym: Feb 25, 2011

Good Will Hrunting posted:

So basically I am expected to come up with a flawless solution with zero bugs that I have the time to go through and test in the constraints of 30 minutes? I mean sure, it's not a particularly hard problem, but that still seems unrealistic to me and once again beyond the whole "we want to see how you solve a problem" that people said these interviews were about. If I had time, I would have stepped through and seen most of the mistakes I made pretty quickly. But I didn't have time. So am I supposed to code... faster?

It depends the interviewer, but for me:

It doesn't have to be flawless mistakes are kinda expected, but if you detect them without me asking it's a big plus, if I have to prod you with leading questions for twenty minutes it's a minus.

Wanting to see how you solve a problem is both how you come up with a solution as well as how you identify bugs in your approach or code.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:32

The Fool: Oct 16, 2003

This is an old tweet, but maybe it will help you feel better

https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en

edit: have some more

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:33

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

apseudonym posted:

Wanting to see how you solve a problem is both how you come up with a solution as well as how you identify bugs in your approach or code.

I would have stepped through multiple example cases, starting with a correct one, then like you said something ridiculous with all the same characters, then one with something like 1 char and 3 chars to make sure I got steps missed in the sequence properly returning false. But unfortunately I had to so some stupid palindrome poo poo and a binary tree question first.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:36

MrMoo: Sep 14, 2000

apseudonym posted:

That's not the policy at Google, at least not for the last 4 years I've been interviewing, you can get hired with an interviewer giving a strong negative -- but it's pretty uncommon to get a strong negative while everyone else is glowing.

I got one meh and everyone else was chuffed, took like 4 weeks to get the meh answer and the "job had gone" by the time the response was filed. That's with Google NYC.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:38

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

The Fool posted:

edit: have some more

This makes me feel marginally less useless after my first tech screen round+ interviews have been rejections, thanks! Still wondering if I chose the wrong career path and that imposter syndrome is strong as hell right now.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:45

Jose Valasquez: Apr 8, 2005

The Fool posted:

This is an old tweet, but maybe it will help you feel better

https://twitter.com/mxcl/status/608682016205344768?lang=en

edit: have some more

Qualified people get rejected all the time and nobody should take it as a judgment of their ability or self worth.

That being said the Homebrew guy admitted that he isn't very good at designing software and that he is an rear end in a top hat. Given those two things the hiring process worked perfectly in this scenario.
Also, the number of people at Google using Macbooks is way lower than 90% and those that do generally aren't using homebrew (at least not for work)

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:45

apseudonym: Feb 25, 2011

MrMoo posted:

I got one meh and everyone else was chuffed, took like 4 weeks to get the meh answer and the "job had gone" by the time the response was filed. That's with Google NYC.

If it was for a specific team, as opposed to general SWE where team matching comes after, then it's more on the highering manager, and it sounds like they found someone else :shrug:

Good Will Hrunting posted:

I would have stepped through multiple example cases, starting with a correct one, then like you said something ridiculous with all the same characters, then one with something like 1 char and 3 chars to make sure I got steps missed in the sequence properly returning false. But unfortunately I had to so some stupid palindrome poo poo and a binary tree question first.

Yeah that sucks :smith:

sometimes interviewers don't do good at managing the time or they expected you to be faster than you were.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 21:46

Rocko Bonaparte: Mar 12, 2002; Every day is Friday!

Good Will Hrunting posted:

So basically I am expected to come up with a flawless solution with zero bugs that I have the time to go through and test in the constraints of 30 minutes?

I'm not in a hiring position so I don't know but I sure as hell hope that's not how this normally goes. I didn't even necessarily want people to write in a real language when I was in a hiring position before because I didn't want to get bogged down in semantics. Also, the pijin language they'd come up with was sometimes even more illustrative of their background than if we stuck to a real one. I did give bonus points for going through the code afterwards, spitball some stuff, and maybe tweak a few things. However, it wasn't like I planned to take that code, run it, and throw out that candidate if it didn't work.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 22:13

feedmegin: Jul 30, 2008

Jose Valasquez posted:

That being said the Homebrew guy admitted that he isn't very good at designing software and that he is an rear end in a top hat. Given those two things the hiring process worked perfectly in this scenario.
Also, the number of people at Google using Macbooks is way lower than 90% and those that do generally aren't using homebrew (at least not for work)

Also...homebrew is nice and all, but it's not like genius level software? It's a package management system. Used by lots of people != the guy who wrote it is a 100% certified genius hire.

Like, how many people use that Javascript leftpad module?

Also also, from the wiki for homebrew - 'Homebrew does not honor the default privileges of /usr/local; directory ownership is changed from root with group permissions for the wheel group to the installing user and the "admin" group'

Ummmm. Maybe it's my Linux/commercial Unix background but that's making me dry heave.

feedmegin fucked around with this message at 23:21 on Jun 28, 2018

# ? Jun 28, 2018 23:18

pokeyman: Nov 26, 2006; That elephant ate my entire platoon.

feedmegin posted:

Also...homebrew is nice and all, but it's not like genius level software? It's a package management system.

Making a working package manager seems to be shockingly difficult. Anything remotely resembling a success should be lauded.

(Lauded doesn�t necessarily mean hired though, I agree.)

# ? Jun 28, 2018 23:24

minato: Jun 7, 2004; cutty cain't hang, say 7-up.; Taco Defender

apseudonym posted:

It doesn't have to be flawless mistakes are kinda expected, but if you detect them without me asking it's a big plus, if I have to prod you with leading questions for twenty minutes it's a minus.

Wanting to see how you solve a problem is both how you come up with a solution as well as how you identify bugs in your approach or code.

This. The solution doesn't give as much signal as the process. Expressing the thought process reveals how you deal with stuff you've never seen before; throw spaghetti at the wall or systematically break down the problem.

I give questions to SREs like "You get paged that Service X is delivering a 500 Internal Server error, what do you do check first?", and while "Check the logs" is an ok answer, an even better one is "In my experience the most common reason for internal service errors is resource exhaustion, misconfiguration, and buggy code, so I would check for all those things in that order. To check for resource exhaustion I would ...". This demonstrates a systematic approach, which matters more to me than someone who knows a lot but flounders around picking things to try.

# ? Jun 28, 2018 23:33

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

Maybe I should apply for Junior jobs since my 4.5 years of experience is Not Good experience for more than half of my tenure?

# ? Jun 28, 2018 23:36

mrmcd: Feb 22, 2003; Pictured: The only good cop (a fictional one).

Good Will Hrunting posted:

Maybe I should apply for Junior jobs since my 4.5 years of experience is Not Good experience for more than half of my tenure?

Nah you just need to chill and keep doing interviews. Every place is really heavily weighted for false negatives. I got like 3 or 4 rejections and 2 offers before the Google offer.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 00:20

Eggnogium: Jun 1, 2010; Never give an inch! Hnnnghhhhhh!

minato posted:

This. The solution doesn't give as much signal as the process. Expressing the thought process reveals how you deal with stuff you've never seen before; throw spaghetti at the wall or systematically break down the problem.

I give questions to SREs like "You get paged that Service X is delivering a 500 Internal Server error, what do you do check first?", and while "Check the logs" is an ok answer, an even better one is "In my experience the most common reason for internal service errors is resource exhaustion, misconfiguration, and buggy code, so I would check for all those things in that order. To check for resource exhaustion I would ...". This demonstrates a systematic approach, which matters more to me than someone who knows a lot but flounders around picking things to try.

Am I crazy for thinking that is a wrong answer? Given only the facts of 500s I would definitely first go digging for more info before making any assumptions about the root cause. Like maybe after working on a product for several months you could have developed a sane heuristic of �500s => very likely resource exhaustion� but it would be only for that service and the wrong approach without the experience to back it up.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 07:08

Keetron: Sep 26, 2008; Check out my enormous testicles in my TFLC log!

Eggnogium posted:

Am I crazy for thinking that is a wrong answer? Given only the facts of 500s I would definitely first go digging for more info before making any assumptions about the root cause. Like maybe after working on a product for several months you could have developed a sane heuristic of �500s => very likely resource exhaustion� but it would be only for that service and the wrong approach without the experience to back it up.

Also put an item on the techdebt backlog to implement proper error codes.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 08:00

Doh004: Apr 22, 2007; Mmmmm Donuts...

Eggnogium posted:

Am I crazy for thinking that is a wrong answer? Given only the facts of 500s I would definitely first go digging for more info before making any assumptions about the root cause. Like maybe after working on a product for several months you could have developed a sane heuristic of �500s => very likely resource exhaustion� but it would be only for that service and the wrong approach without the experience to back it up.

Minato's point is it's more nuanced than just a solution and lays out a plan to find the root of the problem. Interview answers don't *need* to be technically correct as long as you explain your thought process and back it up sufficiently.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 12:17

Bruegels Fuckbooks: Sep 14, 2004; Now, listen - I know the two of you are very different from each other in a lot of ways, but you have to understand that as far as Grandpa's concerned, you're both pieces of shit! Yeah. I can prove it mathematically.

Good Will Hrunting posted:

Yep, it's Bridgewater. My roommie told his boss before he started interviewing and his boss was cool with him taking a day off per week to interview for over a month. Place may be culty, but that's a cool as gently caress culture. Of course he had been there 3 years and they had established a relationship of trust, and he was accomplishing his work still and agreed to stay an extra bit to train a potential new hire or offload his work but that's still pretty awesome, imo.

i've known people who work at both amazon and bridgewater, and tbh it's kind of like comparing the mormons to the heaven's gate cult - amazon may dress you up in weird underwear and push you to succeed, but bridgewater will cut your balls off and make you drink poison.

Bruegels Fuckbooks fucked around with this message at 13:49 on Jun 29, 2018

# ? Jun 29, 2018 13:02

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

Keetron posted:

Also put an item on the techdebt backlog to implement proper error codes.

That is the proper error code to send to clients when something falls over while serving an HTTP request, though?

Doh004 posted:

Minato's point is it's more nuanced than just a solution and lays out a plan to find the root of the problem. Interview answers don't *need* to be technically correct as long as you explain your thought process and back it up sufficiently.

I think that when I approach a novel troubleshooting problem with preconceived notions of what probably went wrong that I often end up wasting time disproving my guesswork before making real progress on the problem, but that could be faulty/biased memory - certainly haven't been rigorously keeping track.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 14:21

Doh004: Apr 22, 2007; Mmmmm Donuts...

Munkeymon posted:

I think that when I approach a novel troubleshooting problem with preconceived notions of what probably went wrong that I often end up wasting time disproving my guesswork before making real progress on the problem, but that could be faulty/biased memory - certainly haven't been rigorously keeping track.

I think that's a really important thing to consider (not letting your biases force you into tunnel vision) - but I expect an experienced engineer to use their previous experiences to inform their thought processes moving forward.

That said, I also expect people to begin answering those types of questions by gathering more information and requirements up front (it'll almost never hurt to ask more questions).

# ? Jun 29, 2018 14:48

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

mrmcd posted:

Nah you just need to chill and keep doing interviews. Every place is really heavily weighted for false negatives. I got like 3 or 4 rejections and 2 offers before the Google offer.

Chill is the operative word here. I can't believe I stumbled on a simple max stock prices array question yesterday. I'm really starting to stress/burn myself out.

Broadening my horizons outside of mostly start-ups might be a good idea. I got some Goon recommendations via PM that I've added to my list but after the 4-5 still in the pipeline that I'm working on now, I'll probably take a brief break from all of this to decompress. It really is almost a second full-time job.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 15:19

prisoner of waffles: May 8, 2007; Ah! well a-day! what evil looks
Had I from old and young!
Instead of the cross, the fishmech
About my neck was hung.

Just want to second what someone else said earlier in the thread: interviews are not about you or your intrinsic worth, they're about what you and a few employees of a business think of a possible employment relationship. An offer would feel validating and pleasant (and the structure of many of these interviews is essentially akin to a pop quiz or entrance exam, which can kind of throw at least me into a "school days, validate me for being smart plz" mindset) but no offer shouldn't be taken as a much more ambiguous signal.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 15:49

prisoner of waffles: May 8, 2007; Ah! well a-day! what evil looks
Had I from old and young!
Instead of the cross, the fishmech
About my neck was hung.

... is it weird to say that I feel like the next recession is coming on, that the "animal spirits" have changed?

I get this feeling like the next time I'm searching for a job, there will be a bazillion formerly-employed and what's more formerly-quite-employable people very actively searching for jobs and the filters and processes will probably be even worse as a result.

if I were william blake I'd hallucinate a vision and then write a poem about beholding a chilling figure holding a "will code for food" sign

# ? Jun 29, 2018 15:55

Good Will Hrunting: Oct 8, 2012; I changed my mind.
I'm not sorry.

That's a terrifying thought and does wonders for my already increasing stress :ohdear:

Anyway, here's a loosely reproduced version of my solution to "Given an array of integers and a target number, return a set of pairs of integers in the array that add to target" (I'm trying these again in a similar condition - in a notepad with no syntax or highlighting)

E: I asked and yes, numbers can be duplicated
E2: When I was first solving the problem I assumed it was Pairs of indices (not sure why I thought this, probably because it makes the problem more complicated given the clarity of the duplicated number constraint and I always assume they're trying to trick me with a "gotcha") so I began with a mapping to preserve the locations and as I was explaining this and had already coded all this poo poo on the whiteboard it would have been hard to have erase it.

code:

public Set<Pair> sumPairs(Integer[] nums, Integer trgt) {
  Map<Integer, Set<Integer>> numbersToIndices = new HashMap<Integer, Set<Integer>>();
  Set<Pair> result = new HashSet<Pair>();

  //create mapping of number -> set of all index where it appears 
  for(Integer i: nums) {
    if(numbersToIndices.contains(nums[i])){
      numbersToIndices.get(nums[i]).add(i)
    } else {
      Set<Integer> newSet = new Set<Integer>();
      newSet.add(i)
      numbersToIndices.put(nums[i], newSet);
    }
  }

  for(int i = 0; i < nums.length - 1; i++) {
      Integer diff = trgt - nums[i];
      if(numbersToIndices.containsKey(diff)) {
        Set<Integer> allLocs = numbersToIndices.get(diff);
        allLocs.stream().forEach(loc -> result.add(nums[i], nums[loc]));
      }
  }

  return result;
}

Good Will Hrunting fucked around with this message at 16:42 on Jun 29, 2018

# ? Jun 29, 2018 16:30

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

prisoner of waffles posted:

... is it weird to say that I feel like the next recession is coming on, that the "animal spirits" have changed?

I get this feeling like the next time I'm searching for a job, there will be a bazillion formerly-employed and what's more formerly-quite-employable people very actively searching for jobs and the filters and processes will probably be even worse as a result.

if I were william blake I'd hallucinate a vision and then write a poem about beholding a chilling figure holding a "will code for food" sign

No, it's not weird and in fact supported by indicators like the yield curve. Makes me want to job hunt even though I haven't been here that long because I don't wanna be stuck here through the next recession. Not that it's bad or anything - just that I know I can do better.

Should probably also sell my place, the thought of which makes interviewing seem downright pleasant.

# ? Jun 29, 2018 16:32

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 9, 2024 22:47

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

May I introduce you all to a little thing I like to call democratic socialism?

# ? Jun 29, 2018 16:37

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > Oldie Programming: Career Advice, Questions, Change of Directions

«‹›575 »