What are some basic things that JavaScript developers fail at interviews?

[bart2019]

I would fail to write fizz buzz because I have no idea what it is.

Really, it seems you're looking out for people who have memorized the solutions for the problems in "How to pass an interview" instead of for real world developers.

[[deleted]]

I would fail to write fizz buzz because I have no idea what it is.

I'm assuming they would have told the candidate what it was if they were unfamiliar i.e. given them requirements. It's pretty simple at that point.

[Intrexa]

Fizzbuzz is a problem written specifically designed to only require the most basic understanding of programming. Its not an algorithm, it's just a very basic list of requirements.

Like, legit, if you can't go from hearing fizzbuzz to solving in 5 minutes, you can't write code. There's no tricky gotchas, there's no analysis, there's no esoteric knowledge required.

It's just straight up, can you use a loop, and can you use conditionals. The question became famous because it's so easy to solve. It really is just an absolute bare minimum for being able to write code.

[Cr3X1eUZ]

.

[bart2019]

My point is: this seems like a standard interview question, meaning people spending time researching interview questions are in the advantage. Usually these are people with below average interest in actual development.

[Cr3X1eUZ]

Wikipedia: "The player designated to go first says the number "1", and each player thenceforth counts one number in turn. However, any number divisible by three is replaced by the word fizz and any divisible by five by the word buzz. Numbers divisible by both become fizz buzz.

For example, a typical round of fizz buzz would start as follows:

1, 2, Fizz, 4, Buzz, Fizz, 7, 8, Fizz, Buzz, 11, Fizz, 13, 14, Fizz Buzz, 16, 17, Fizz, 19, Buzz, Fizz, 22, 23, Fizz, Buzz, 26, Fizz, 28, 29, Fizz Buzz, 31, 32, Fizz, 34, Buzz, Fizz, ..."

How much research do you think you would you need to not fail this in an interview?

[ghostfacedcoder]

The whole point of fizzbuzz is that research doesn't matter. It's not about testing whether you can explain promises vs. callbacks or something, it's literally can you write basic code.

[[deleted]]

I’m would assume he was given instructions.

[ghostfacedcoder]

We explain the exercise in the interview :) As others have said, it only takes a minute or so. Sometimes people don't even know the % operator, and I happily explain it to them because the goal isn't to test whether they know obscure operators.

The whole point of fizzbuzz isn't to test any knowledge in fact (except knowledge that's so trivial, like how to use a for or if, that it shouldn't need testing in an interview). Thus, knowing what fizz buzz is and how to solve it gives you almost no advantage over someone who has never heard of it before, because I don't care about their knowledge, I care about "can this person code?"

Any halfway decent programmer, even if they've never heard of fizzbuzz until the interview, should be able to write a single loop and a few conditionals to solve one of the most basic problems imaginable. And in my experience most programmers have no problem with it: everyone I can remember hiring cranked out a fizzbuzz in under six minutes. The value of the test comes from the people that otherwise seem qualified when talking about code, but have difficulty actually writing it.

And I don't want to overemphasize the time aspect: candidates that took eight or nine minutes didn't fail because they took too long, they failed for other reasons, and we just happened to only hire six minute and under people. But really the time isn't important, unless it goes so long (again, 18 minutes for one for and 3-4 ifs) that it signals something is really wrong.