Interviews - The other side...

[Churchill]

Is it still required to write win32 code? Even if it is, I don't see why it is expected that someone should know any more than, "it's required to make win32 code work".

And surely this should have been optimised out of windows development, in the same way that having to export all of your new windows was. If it hasn't been, why not? IIRC all it achieves is something compiler optimisation can do?

BTW, if you're having such a problem recruiting, can I have the job?

tim

Yeah, course you can, you're even less suited than the original candidate.

[Churchill]

All this proves is that you are not "fit" to judge other people. You believe obscure technical features are the key to success in software development. Your mentality seeks elitism through trivia and in the process you make software that is unmaintainable, obscure, and overly complex.

Bollocks. If you're required to communicate your ideas with other the other software engineers you have to have a certain credibility.

The questions are not elitist, they're relevant to the position for which we're recruiting.

[tim123]

All this proves is that you are not "fit" to judge other people. You believe obscure technical features are the key to success in software development. Your mentality seeks elitism through trivia and in the process you make software that is unmaintainable, obscure, and overly complex.

I failed an interview once because I couldn't answer (and still can't answer) "write down the correct syntax to define a 2-D array of pointers to functions". This was the one and only question that I got before it was obvious from the interviewer's resonse that the interview was over.

For what I do (and therefore what the job was), typically you will need to do this a maximum of once per project (when creating a state machine) and when I need to do this I simply cut and paste from the previous project.

Surely, understanding why you might want to sove the problem using a state machine is a million times more important than being able to define it, but no, the guy wasn't interested in that, he wanted a syntax guru even if they hadn't the faintest clue about real design.

tim

[tim123]

Yeah, course you can, you're even less suited than the original candidate.

Why, because I disagree with you on how important knowing the answer to this question is?

How silly

tim

[threaded]

I failed an interview once because I couldn't answer (and still can't answer) "write down the correct syntax to define a 2-D array of pointers to functions". This was the one and only question that I got before it was obvious from the interviewer's resonse that the interview was over.

Worked one place where the entire product was based on a pointer to an array of function pointers.

One line of code, about 20 chars long, I kid you not, everything else was support for that one line.

[Churchill]

Why, because I disagree with you on how important knowing the answer to this question is?

How silly

tim

Sorry, I thought you were being tongue in cheek. You're a contractor, this role is for a staffer.

[tim123]

Bollocks. If you're required to communicate your ideas with other the other software engineers you have to have a certain credibility.

The questions are not elitist, they're relevant to the position for which we're recruiting.

I can't judge whether the questions are elitist because I don't know them.

But what I do know is you cannot judge a person's software understanding on the basis of an answer to a very narrow syntax question. You could simply have asked a question on something that he has genuinely never encountered.

You didn't answer my question. Is it really still necessary to use the PASCAL directive when writing windows code? Note that I don't mean "when writing raw API code", but when writing higher level MFC code, which is what everybody does now (and why no-one will give me a job doing it).

Actually, I've just managed to find the answer for myself as (quite by chance) I have an MFC book on my desk (proping up the screen - yes really!).

It says: "if you have some old win16 code lying (sic) about it usually makes use of the PASCAL calling convection ... This is now obsolete" and that was written in 1999.

So ISTM perfectly reasonable that someone whos career started 10 years ago, could easily never have come across it.

tim

[tim123]

Sorry, I thought you were being tongue in cheek. You're a contractor, this role is for a staffer.

No, The company want a staffer, but they can't seem to find one who's qualified.

What would they rather have, a staffer who can't do the job or a contractor who can?

tim

[Churchill]

I can't judge whether the questions are elitist because I don't know them.

But what I do know is you cannot judge a person's software understanding on the basis of an answer to a very narrow syntax question. You could simply have asked a question on something that he has genuinely never encountered.

You didn't answer my question. Is it really still necessary to use the PASCAL directive when writing windows code? Note that I don't mean "when writing raw API code", but when writing higher level MFC code, which is what everybody does now (and why no-one will give me a job doing it).

Actually, I've just managed to find the answer for myself as (quite by chance) I have an MFC book on my desk (proping up the screen - yes really!).

It says: "if you have some old win16 code lying (sic) about it usually makes use of the PASCAL calling convection ... This is now obsolete" and that was written in 1999.

So ISTM perfectly reasonable that someone whos career started 10 years ago, could easily never have come across it.

tim

Look, the guy has put 10 years C & C++ experience in a Windows and Realtime software environment. According to our test results he's not as experienced as he made out. The answers he gave to our verbal questions along with his written test results show that he isn't experienced enough for the role. He won't be getting the job, end of!

Btw, we don't use MFC on our CE platform.

[lukemg]

You will end up with some spod who smells, lives for computers and annoys every single person they meet.
You need someone smart, who wants to get on and has decent personality - in other words, the chap you have just rejected.
If you want someone 100% capable of the job on day 1 - hire a contractor, otherwise the staffer will be bored off his spuds by month 1 and start looking again.
HTH