News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Ask HN: Has there been any academic research into softwar... by gwbas1c on Thursday April 25, 2019 @02:07PM (#19750887)
> "if you want to work here, you are going to do what I say."

I recently started pointing that out, in a roundabout way, when I run interviews.

Why? If a candidate starts arguing about xml versus JSON, the candidate misses the point when I bring up xml. (Hint, I only discuss xml because it allows discussing widely known concepts that are very general and have little to do with xml versus JSON.)

Or, if a candidate says to me, "why can't we use async-await" in a particular question, the candidate also misses the point of the question. (Hint, I'm trying to test knowledge of concepts that's easy to test when doing something without async=await.)

Interview questions are always contrived and end up as an "if you want to work here, you are going to do what I say" exercise. If a candidate can't work within the constraints of a short interview exercise, then what will happen when the constraints of the job come into play? We never get to use our favorite patterns and APIs all the time.

Re:Ask HN: Has there been any academic research into softwar... by jonhankok on Thursday April 25, 2019 @08:13PM (#19753738)
Wow, if I was in an interview where the interviewer was that closed-minded, I would definitely turn down an offer but I might just walk out. If they are unwilling to consider even discussing useful patterns in an interview, working there must be hell.