> As in most descriptions of it are annoyingly ambiguous.
My very first interviewer (intentionally) didn't spec fizzbuzz correctly. The real test was whether the candidate listened to the customer's/lead engineer's spec instead of jumping to conclusions.
Fortunately, I was just entering college and hadn't heard of fizzbuzz before. I passed the "test" but for the wrong reason.
Re:Fifty Fizzbuzzes
by segh on Thursday November 01, 2018 @09:15PM
(#18359974)
Being purposely misleading then penalising those who are misled doesn't seem like a good hiring strategy, but then again, I've never tried to hire someone.
My very first interviewer (intentionally) didn't spec fizzbuzz correctly. The real test was whether the candidate listened to the customer's/lead engineer's spec instead of jumping to conclusions.
Fortunately, I was just entering college and hadn't heard of fizzbuzz before. I passed the "test" but for the wrong reason.