|
I hate to dredge it up, but there's a closed form expression for the nth Fibonacci number so recursion or iteration are clearly the wrong thing to use.
|
# ¿ Jun 10, 2016 20:07 |
|
|
# ¿ May 10, 2024 19:55 |
|
PT6A posted:Instead of deriving the closed-form solution, I just calculated the first four numbers in the sequence and noted that they were all perfect squares. You don't need to be some insane mathematician to do that, frankly. A solution assuming a very small finite set matches a much wider pattern without a proof is itself a horror.
|
# ¿ Jun 13, 2016 22:06 |
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:If you can write C++ you can write C#; if you have provable experience with C++ moving to C# is pretty easy. The theory I usually hear about senior people with known experience is that they've essentially become managers and haven't written new code for a few years. At some point, I would expect most people who no longer interact with code to lose their abilities, much the same way you forget the specifics of advanced mathematics unless you keep up studies. Not sure why they wouldn't interview for managerial positions if that were the case though.
|
# ¿ Jun 18, 2016 02:23 |
|
Centripetal Horse posted:I am also questioning where companies are finding so many candidates who can't at least sketch out a reasonable approximation of something like FizzBuzz. This sounds more like, "putting people on the spot to code useless poo poo is a bad test of their actual abilities." Tbf, fizz buzz can be solved with a loop and the modulo operator; not exactly bleeding edge stuff there. My favorite solution is the one that crashes the compiler and makes it vomit the answer in the error log though.
|
# ¿ Jun 18, 2016 05:29 |
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Heh, that sounds like a pretty great solution. Too many \n if I read it correctly.
|
# ¿ Jun 18, 2016 06:06 |
|
ultrafilter posted:If none of the senior level developers you're interviewing are familiar with a topic, then you have to examine the possibility that it's just not that important in practice. Confirmed. I know how to use bit wise operators, and understand their function; I've needed them maybe 1-2x in the past several years. If you're hiring for a position where they would be necessary day to day, talk to HR about filtering better or types of specific experience you'd like to see.
|
# ¿ Jun 19, 2016 15:30 |
|
PT6A posted:You don't need to write super-optimized code to make a bit counter, you just need to know how to use & to determine whether a specific bit is set. It's no more involved than using | to create a bitmask, though I suppose if you have absolutely no idea what you're doing, one is more confusing than the other. std::bitset<5> foo; foo[2] == true;
|
# ¿ Jun 20, 2016 18:58 |
|
I think the worst interview I attended was for a medical technology company. Their CEO went on this huge tangent about how they were very focused on technology/programming. Immediately after that their CTO asked what you could do with classes in c++ that you couldn't do with structs. I said they were identical except default public/private, he told me I was wrong, then I pulled out the relevant section of the specification (which I keep on my iPad), and told him he was probably thinking of POD types, but that classes could also be POD types, and nothing stopped a struct from not being a POD. I also had a few phone calls with games companies over typical algorithm stuff. One I provided an amortized O(1) solution with worst case O(N) and then I had to spend 10 minutes explaining amortization to the interviewer. Another couldn't grok an expanding/collapsing window to find some array element in O(N) using two iterators. Another got super confused when I provided a solution in big-theta(NlogN). Hopefully I'm done dealing with terrible interviewers for a long while though.
|
# ¿ Jun 20, 2016 21:11 |
|
genki posted:To be fair to those interviewers, one of the major indicators for success within a company is attitude, and having someone that looks down on their peers because their peers may not be as knowledgeable as them is probably someone you don't want to hire into your team. It isn't clear from your statement that that's something that you did (I would make that assumption from saying "terrible interviewers" but maybe that was just a humor comment and not an condemnation of their ability to do their jobs), just something that it's important to note if someone ever gets rejected from an interview where they actually knew more than the interviewer (at least, so far as you know, making interviewees explain basic concepts really helps expose what it will be like to work with that person in a lot of ways, so it's a useful interview technique). I don't doubt that those interviewers are perfectly able to do their day to day work (except for class/struct guy). Universally their response to relatively simple concepts was to say, "you're wrong"; the only valid response I know of being to provide a proof that the solution is correct. It's been my experience that if an interview gets to this point, it's very unlikely to move forward.
|
# ¿ Jun 21, 2016 13:34 |
|
GeneralZod posted:Did he tell you "the answer", in the end? He got a little pale; the CEO was also in the room when I pulled out the spec and dropped the truth bomb. I then ended the interview. I'm still fairly certain that he thought something being a struct enforced being a POD type.
|
# ¿ Jun 21, 2016 13:38 |
|
Xarn posted:No wonder he was confused, who the hell specifies big theta? If you're going through the trouble of proving the runtime of your algorithm, why not spend the extra 20 seconds to show a lower bound?
|
# ¿ Jun 21, 2016 13:39 |
|
Cast_No_Shadow posted:Could also be an intentional thing. Coding nerds do not have a good reputation when it comes to explaining why someone else is wrong in constructive way. I might want to test if someone not only has the confidence to defend something they think is right in the face of 'power' saying its wrong but also to see of they do it in an educational way or a smug haha your dumb and I must prove Im right way. Please don't be combative as an interviewer. It makes a very stressful situation much worse. If you want to make sure someone can explain things thoroughly, try, "I'm not sure I follow, .." over "No, the thing you said is wrong" /especially/ when the thing they said is not wrong. There is one company I have labeled as toxic for doing this both times I interviewed with them (right out of school, and the last time I was hunting); I will not pursue candidacy with them at any point in the future. Basically, don't be smug yourself just to see if they're smug. You're being interviewed too.
|
# ¿ Jun 22, 2016 12:19 |
|
Sex Bumbo posted:Has anyone intereviewed using HackerRankX? I'm not sure, but maybe? I think I did something through their site; where it was a 60-75 minute coding challenge with 3-4 problems that needed to be solved. Was basically a typical phone screen without the person on the other end. Except they just sent a link and asked me to do it at my leisure sometime in the next week. If it's what I'm thinking of, anyway; though, there are several that are basically the same.
|
# ¿ Jul 12, 2016 12:39 |
|
WINNINGHARD posted:im interviewing people for a junior dev position this week. A guy came in with a resume stating 2 years of django experience, along with a bachelor's degree in CS. Been a few years since I did real Python stuff.. I'm going to assume that xxx.all() and xxx.filter() are both generators, but who gives a poo poo because your iterating over 10MM objects. And then you're allocating 10MM objects, which also seems bad. I'm not sure if counting the objects would expand the generator(probably does?), but that's bad too. I feel like that's more than one mistake though. Or to put it another way, assuming filter is a generator, just return the filter and you're done in O(1) because actually iterating over that mess is someone else's job. Oh and congrats on 10MM sales. E: misread and thought it was simpler. Assuming all() is a generator that returns things sorted by date (or has arguments to do so), you could still write a generator to return all duplicates without actually iterating over everything or allocating millions of dumb garbage. Marginally more complicated than just calling filter (though not by much). leper khan fucked around with this message at 04:04 on Jul 15, 2016 |
# ¿ Jul 15, 2016 04:00 |
|
WINNINGHARD posted:Not quite, it's a django specific thing. Sales.objects.filter()... etc are django ORM calls and those methods return an object that looks and acts like a list. If you want to cheat, yes, it is that easy. That people do is hilarious, because very few people care about your grades in college (as opposed to high school/SAT/ACT).
|
# ¿ Jul 15, 2016 12:42 |
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:The funniest things I saw were companies asking for those words or equally ridiculous ones while offering absolute beans for pay. I really want to know what goes through somebody's head when they demand top talent but offer like $45k. Programmers aren't cheap, especially if you want the best ones. I've taken jobs below market. Granted I've not stopped looking for work when doing that, but I'd rather get my expenses covered than drain my savings. I'd probably play poker full time instead of working for peon wages though. The hourly is better, if it's a bit boring.
|
# ¿ Jul 18, 2016 18:58 |
|
The_Franz posted:"Top Tier University" seems to be a popular buzzphrase too which seems especially ridiculous when they pair it with positions that demand a decade of experience. Hey man, my state school is a top university (in CS). And I didn't graduate with debt.
|
# ¿ Jul 18, 2016 19:01 |
|
Hughlander posted:Actually it's just HR speak for "You were in school 25 years ago? You're not exploitable enough, pass" I know someone who has been a tech director for years and was dropped late in the interview process because the CEO found out he never went to college. Literal years of experience doing the job listed doesn't matter as much to some people as what you did 30 years ago.
|
# ¿ Jul 19, 2016 15:10 |
|
UnfurledSails posted:I hate it when interviewers waste my time. I'm given a question, so I briefly talk about the simplest, slowest solution before saying "But I think I can do better than that. Let's see what we can do here..." I've had multiple interviews where I was stopped at this point and forced to code the brute force solution and explain it in painstaking detail. Then we just ran out of time when it came to solving the problem in a nontrivial manner. I could have used those extra 5-10 minutes! Bonus points if you get an RJ for being slow/not finishing.
|
# ¿ Jul 24, 2016 17:26 |
|
Cuntpunch posted:Am I wildly crazy to imagine that someone applying for a senior developer position with nearly 20 years of experience should probably be able to code, from scratch, on a whiteboard, a basic 'count the number of times each letter occurs in a string' method - that works and is functional? Are you taking off for missing a semicolon or w/e? Because I'm prone to that on a whiteboard. Not that anyone shouldn't be able to come up with this in like 5 minutes.. code:
So no, you're not wildly crazy. The people that are applying for the position very well may be though.
|
# ¿ Aug 9, 2016 20:33 |
|
MrMoo posted:I guess they liked it as they are lining up another interview Another company said I "crushed it", giving a JavaScript answer of all things. Question is so easy if you're familiar with C++11. Just spitballing what you like or don't about it. I should read what's all in 17 now you mention it. Do you have C++ on your resume?
|
# ¿ Aug 16, 2016 13:31 |
|
MrMoo posted:3 × interviews in Philly, 1 included CSS questions of all things and coding in Java, another included a dynamic programming problem in C++, and another a complex dynamic programming algorithm for image analysis on a whiteboard. So I asked the CSS interviewer questions about cheesesteak If it doesn't have whiz it's not authentic.
|
# ¿ Aug 19, 2016 04:37 |
|
ultrafilter posted:Not a believer in provie wit? Whiz wit out or
|
# ¿ Aug 19, 2016 12:02 |
|
sarehu posted:Notably the standard also implies when describing exception unwinding that the object isn't "initialized" until after the constructor body has finished. I didn't find a place that explicitly said that, but I didn't look exhaustively. Is the answer that you'll need to find a new job?
|
# ¿ Aug 23, 2016 20:00 |
|
hobbesmaster posted:A struct is a class. Full stop. I have walked out of interviews because the lead engineer/CTO interviewing me tried to argue that there were significant differences between class and struct in C++11 other than default public/private. Because that's the only difference.
|
# ¿ Aug 23, 2016 20:32 |
|
Tomahawk posted:And this thread is making me glad that I'm not a C++ programmer lol if you think Java is better than C++. I wish Java had half the niceties of C++, also why am I writing Java I did not sign up for this.
|
# ¿ Aug 26, 2016 15:27 |
|
fritz posted:I've been trying to learn myself a scala and have been repeatedly pleasantly surprised at how much useful stuff's floating around out there in the jvm ecosystem, and in particular how nice it is to have a maven for managing dependencies instead of the c++'s world "good luck" policy. ExcessBLarg! posted:But is your average C++ codebase "better" than your average Java codebase? How much C++ do you encounter in the wild that's modern C++11? I feel like C++ allows for a wider range on the "better" spectrum, ranging from horrifying to pleasant. Java seems to condense the range around annoying. I'd rather work with tools that can be nice, rather than tools that prevent me from losing limbs but remain generally unpleasant.
|
# ¿ Aug 26, 2016 20:01 |
|
|
# ¿ May 10, 2024 19:55 |
|
TopherCStone posted:Arbeit makefile is as close as I can get free free macht Arbeit?
|
# ¿ Aug 31, 2016 12:55 |