To be a good driver do you have to be a great mechanic
Alex C.P
programmer.Before I landed a job I attended various interviews.Well
what striked me as stipid is that every one was asking me c++ as if I
have designed the language and the compiler.People are concentrating
on becoming experts in a lang.Not many are thinking about new
ideas.Language was meant as a tool to communicate ideas right.So to be
a good driver do you really have to be a great mechanic.
Neil Butterworth
"Alex C.P" <eagle_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:44a8c766.03010...@posting.google.com...
Programmers build programs (i.e. they are mechanics) - drivers do not
generally build cars.
NeilB
Claudio Puviani
If I hired you to write articles or books, I would be justified in wanting your
skills with English to be adequate (and it's the employer who defines adequate,
not the candidate). If I hired you to write C++ programs, I would be equally
justified in wanting your skills with C++ to be adequate. If I'm running a C++
project, what do I care that you're a "very good programmer" in Java or COBOL,
or whatever it is that your "very good" at? I'd rather hire a "very good
programmer" who doesn't need 6 months of C++ training.
If your argument is "well, I can learn C++ when I need it", my counter argument
is "you needed it for this interview and you failed to prove that you could
learn it".
Claudio Puviani
Madeline Edmunds
Some great drivers were also great mechanics, but some were not. So the
literal answer to your question is, no.
However this is a somewhat strained analogy as far as C++ programming is
concerned. C++ is a complex and powerful language, so you have to know it
well before you can be depended upon to use its power wisely. Naive C++
programmers do more harm than good as I have found through bitter
experience.
JustSomeGuy
candidate from a bad one. This is.. in my opinion... the problem.
"Alex C.P" <eagle_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:44a8c766.03010...@posting.google.com...
Victor Bazarov
> Interviewers need to be extreamly computer literate in order to know a
good
> candidate from a bad one. This is.. in my opinion... the problem.
<OT>
<rhetorical>
Would you really want to work for a company who employs
computer-illiterlate people and asks them to interview
a programmer?
</rhetorical>
It's not just computer literacy that is required from a good
interviewer...
</OT>
Victor
--
Please remove capital A's from my address when replying by mail
Brian Rodenborn
Your analogy is beyond flawed, it's downright incorrect. The C++ programmer
is not the equivalent of the driver, but rather the equivalent of the
automotive engineer. And yes, that person needs to know have cars are built.
The "driver" in your analogy is the end-user of the program. Does someone
who uses an application designed in C++ need to know that language? No, they
need to know how to use the application. Does the person who wrote the app
need to be an expert in C++? I'd say at least a highly skilled
practictioner.
The C++ standard and many fine books on the language are available. A "very
good programmer" should be able to pick up the language in a reasonable
length of time. It's certainly a better use of your time and ours than
whining in a public forum.
Brian Rodenborn
josh
> I am not that much exp.My knowledge of c++ is average.
> I am a very good programmer.
> Before I landed a job I attended various interviews.
> Well what striked me as stipid is that every one was asking me c++ as if I
> have designed the language and the compiler.
That indeed is unnecessary in most cases.
> People are concentrating on becoming experts in a lang.Not many are
> thinking about new ideas.
Such a general statement, it's hard to see what it exactly means. Whether one agrees or not doesn't matter because the matter
is not stated clearly. Those who would agree and those who would disagree would be likely to agree or disagree about different
things.
> Language was meant as a tool to communicate ideas right.
Very true.
> So to be a good driver do you really have to be a great mechanic.
That seems to contradict everything before it. And taken in isolation, not true at all. So, what I'd say upon reading your
words is that you need to learn to express yourself better, the above simply doesn't make much sense and, because of its
vagueness, is open to a wide range of possible speculative interpretations.
Kaz Kylheku
To get across the continent in a piece of shit, unreliable car, you
Stuart Golodetz
A quick masterclass in logic:
Need to write good C++ programs => Need to be knowledgeable about C++ =>
"Average" knowledge won't cut it
If you're going to be writing in C++, any decent company will expect you to
know a reasonable amount about the language, which means you need to
concentrate on trying to become an expert in it if you want to get a
specifically C++ job. Besides, you could be the greatest Fortran programmer
the world has ever seen, is seeing, or will see in years to come, but if you
don't know what a copy constructor is (for example), why the hell would
anyone want to work with you on a C++ project? Sorry if that sounds unfair,
but there it is. Some people have this mistaken belief that being able to
program in one language means you pretty much know any other language. It's
rubbish! (honest) As an example, I recently took a class in Pascal and there
was some strange expectation on the part of everyone else that I'd actually
be able to write complicated stuff in Pascal straight away having never
written any before in my life (to the extent that people kept continually
asking me questions when I was trying to figure it out myself). Every time
you start a new language, you are a newbie (this applies equally to vaguely
average programmers (like me) and renowned experts). Period. You will
probably find it quicker to pick up a new language, you'll understand what
you're *trying* to do better, but ultimately you still have to go through
the process of learning the language. Even if it is from the BNF (yes, I
stupidly did actually try and learn Pascal this way - mistake? ;-))
To sum it up: You may be a very good programmer, but are you a very good C++
programmer? If not then you know what you have to do if you want a C++ job.
HTH,
Stuart.
ale...@gmail.com
Ref -http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000073.html
James Kanze
> "Alex C.P" <eagle_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:44a8c766.03010...@posting.google.com...
> > I am not that much exp.My knowledge of c++ is average.I am a very good
> > programmer.Before I landed a job I attended various interviews.Well
> > what striked me as stipid is that every one was asking me c++ as if I
> > have designed the language and the compiler.People are concentrating
> > on becoming experts in a lang.Not many are thinking about new
> > ideas.Language was meant as a tool to communicate ideas right.So to be
> > a good driver do you really have to be a great mechanic.
> A quick masterclass in logic:
> Need to write good C++ programs => Need to be knowledgeable about C++ =>
> "Average" knowledge won't cut it
worked with, the "average" is sufficient to write most C++.
Most people won't need to know all of the subtle details, but
almost all do know it well enough to effectively use it. The
"average" among them is thus pretty high. If I throw in some of
the candidates that I've interviewed, however... Someone who
doesn't know what a destructor is, or has never heard of the
keyword virtual, doesn't know enough C++ to get the job done.
Hopefully, such people are decidedly below average, but who
knows.
The OP makes the claim that his knowledge is "average", but he
doesn't say what he means by that. The "average" over the
general population is probably not sufficient for much; the
"average" over the active members of the standards committee is
considerably more than what is normally required. And he
doesn't give us any examples of the questions that are bothering
him, so we have no idea whether his complaint is justified or
not. Most programmers don't have to be an expert; domain
knowledge is often more important than C++ knowledge. But all
programmers do need to know some of the basics: when you need
a user defined copy constructor and assignment operator, how to
effectively do clean-up in case of exceptions (RAII, but they
don't necessarily have to know the name), how to disable copy
and assignment (and why), name hiding issues... Unless it is
for something like kernel work in the OS, I'd also expect him to
be familiar with the basic concepts of C++ iterators, to have
used `std::vector`, and to know the basics of IOstream.
> If you're going to be writing in C++, any decent company will expect you to
> know a reasonable amount about the language, which means you need to
> concentrate on trying to become an expert in it if you want to get a
> specifically C++ job.
require of all C++ programmers is, by definition, not "expert",
but just normal competence.
> Besides, you could be the greatest Fortran programmer
> the world has ever seen, is seeing, or will see in years to come, but if you
> don't know what a copy constructor is (for example), why the hell would
> anyone want to work with you on a C++ project?
in other areas, and is reasonably intelligent and willing to
learn, it may be worth hiring and training him, if you can't get
the same level of knowledge elsewhere. It's probably an
exceptional case, but it does occur.
--
James
Ian Collins
If I were building an application in an area where I have little or no
domain knowledge, a non-programmer domain expert would be a more useful
pair than a super C++ programmer with who also lacks domain knowledge.
--
Ian Collins
ale...@gmail.com
I have gone on from C++ to Java now ; and other languages in the way and ahead; I have created structures (http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/26078/A-C-Plug-in-ThreadPool-Design)in C++ because problems needed it.I am not a rock star programmer; but I would not have disappointed anyone who had hired me at that time; When I interview someone now, I never ask anything theoretical; I just ask them what they did; and from their answer dig into some depths and try to gauge ; Yes I do ask some very basic technology related questions but if they have made a difference in their work, are passionate about their designs and structures I tend to like them. To attain any goal you don't need to start off by knowing everything or anything ;love will find a way;okay I did not mean to end it like that; but let it be;
Öö Tiib
> On Saturday, January 4, 2003 10:08:53 PM UTC+5:30, Alex C.P wrote:
> > I am not that much exp.My knowledge of c++ is average.I am a very good
> > programmer.Before I landed a job I attended various interviews.Well
> > what striked me as stipid is that every one was asking me c++ as if I
> > have designed the language and the compiler.People are concentrating
> > on becoming experts in a lang.Not many are thinking about new
> > ideas.Language was meant as a tool to communicate ideas right.So to be
> > a good driver do you really have to be a great mechanic.
>
> I sometimes come back to this question once in a while;There is no right
> or wrong or one answer;Maybe the question itself is flawed;
hold because software engineer *is* like car mechanic, software user is
like car driver. Being good mechanic is not *only* about good knowledge
of the engineering tools however.
> Just some thoughts and some information which can help you when you are
> the interviewer;
>
> I have gone on from C++ to Java now ; and other languages in the way
> and ahead; I have created structures
> (http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/26078/A-C-Plug-in-ThreadPool-Design)
> in C++ because problems needed it.
> I am not a rock star programmer; but I would not have disappointed anyone
> who had hired me at that time; When I interview someone now, I never ask
> anything theoretical; I just ask them what they did; and from their
> answer dig into some depths and try to gauge ; Yes I do ask some very
> basic technology related questions but if they have made a difference
> in their work, are passionate about their designs and structures I tend
> to like them. To attain any goal you don't need to start off by knowing
> everything or anything ;love will find a way;okay I did not mean to end
> it like that; but let it be;
puzzle game on one hand and software in elevator, crane or car on the
other hand. The latter 3 are often written in C++ for various reasons.
If web site hangs, forum drops you out or game crashes then it is bit
different than when elevator hangs, crane drops its load or car
crashes. ;)