|
Here's some advice that I learned the hard way this morning: have a plan for answering technical questions, in the same way that you (should) have a plan for answering hr-style 'have you had a situation where...' questions. For example they asked 'what does a hashmap do' (which is about as easy a technical question as it gets) and because I was nervous/didn't have a plan, I got all jumbled up and started with the way the hashing function maps a large key-space to a smaller space which is used as an index and then I got into collisions and how they related to buckets and then kind of waffled around and didn't actually answer the question. What I should have said is a) what you'd use it for b) what particular operations/situations it's good and bad at, and then finally c) how it works. Oh well.
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2012 02:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
BirdOfPlay posted:Now that I've seen this phrase used a couple of times (especially in regards to it being a bad thing), I'm curious about what exactly it means. You're surely not taking about ways to trim the fat off of algorithms before implementation, right? Or just designing them, initially, in terms of running faster? Knuth posted:There is no doubt that the grail of efficiency leads to abuse. Programmers waste enormous amounts of time thinking about, or worrying about, the speed of noncritical parts of their programs, and these attempts at efficiency actually have a strong negative impact when debugging and maintenance are considered. We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil. So he's saying, there's a tradeoff between optimization and maintainability (and coding time and correctness etc etc). With low-level bit-fiddling optimizations, you're dramatically reducing the maintainability and "97%" of the time you're doing it in a place that doesn't need the speed, so you're just making your program worse. This tradeoff is a little less true with algorithmic efficiency (ie a better algorithm doesn't necessarily screw up your debugging as much), and the gains are usually much more impressive, so the tipping point of whether an optimization is worthwhile changes. The general principle of "balance the costs and benefits of making optimizations instead of just going nuts on them" holds. awesmoe fucked around with this message at 22:11 on Dec 10, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2012 22:00
|
|
|
e: nm I kind of misread the point. However if you only learn things you're required to learn, why would someone want to hire you over someone else?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 02:03
|
|
|
shrughes posted:Well, all employment is at-will. That's not some unusual thing and it's really quite ridiculous when you look at other countries where that's not the legal situation. The "90-day probationary period" is pretty much legally redundant. What do you mean? Ridiculous good or ridiculous bad? (I'm from a country with actual labour laws so I might have a different perspective than you)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 08:51
|
|
|
shrughes posted:Other countries are what's ridiculous. I don't know what you mean by "labour laws" (we have them here in the U.S.) but generally if somebody sucks at doing their job you should be able to fire them right away, without worrying and without the overhead of potential legal costs, without having to spend time and effort documenting that they were bad employees. What's ridiculous is the notion that you should have to keep giving your money to people you don't want to give money to.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2012 22:49
|
|
|
gucci void main posted:Three hours later after a phone call and it's now at 55k + 500 for relocation. I guess bitching does get you increases, at least. If you started looking for jobs paying 55k in NYC how hard to you think it would be to find one better than this?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 01:42
|
|
|
gucci void main posted:Are you questioning whether I think I could find something better in general, or if I took this one and looked to peace out ASAP, or...? The former. If you want to use this one as a stepping stone, you should think about whether this job is lovely even by stepping-stone standards.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2012 02:07
|
|
|
hieronymus posted:If you give 60k~70k range your salary will be 60k. If you give 70k, he might give you 70k, or he might be "how's 65k?" Or he might be "pfft this guys salary expectations are unreasonable, NEXT". Just don't give a number: http://www.kalzumeus.com/2012/01/23/salary-negotiation/
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
Pweller posted:Successfully negotiated a significant % raise this week, up to where I wanted to be, but I'm always left feeling I got hosed and taken advantage of a couple hours after the fact, precisely due to the fact that the deal successfully went through with the other party.... does that make sense? How do I not overthink about these things. Yep, it's human, don't sweat it - what's the calvin and hobbes quote? "A good compromise leaves everybody mad". Focus on the fact that you've _got_ a job which you sound excited about, and think about raises at your annual review or whatevs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
Spraynard Kruger posted:Hey thread, I need some advice on logistics, trying to jump from my first real job to my second. When I was a student looking for my first job it was easy to schedule interviews around classes, but now that I have a job, how do I find the time to interview? Obviously I've got some time off or I could call in sick, but won't I look a little shady if I do that a couple times within a week or two? Some places have been flexible, either meeting on lunch or earlier in the morning, but others seem to insist on scheduling me for 10am on a Tuesday, pretty much necessitating an awkward, mid-week, short-notice day off. Take half a day off and if anyone asks (and you don't want to tell them) say it's a dentist appointment or you're getting some work done on your apartment and need to be home to let people in etc etc. No big deal.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
Dude isn't having a good week 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
null gallagher posted:On other subjects: I had a phone interview with a startup a few days ago. well do you like working 18 hours a day???????
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 22:02
|
|
and run the other way, right? I can understand crazy crunch time hours, but for reworking your existing code base that sounds insane.
|
JawnV6 posted:Do you like working 2 hours in the morning, taking a 3 hour offsite lunch, playing some foosball when you get back, finally putting yourself in front of a screen around 4:30, then loudly complaining about "staying late" as you Actually Work 6 more hours? Mid-tier sales exec thread is that way -----> e: oh wait you said 'Actually Work' in the evening, nvm
|
|
#
¿
Aug 16, 2014 02:20
|
|
|
return0 posted:This is a very smug blog post. e: it gets boring but the start is worth reading. e2: worth skimming all of it awesmoe fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Aug 17, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2014 21:51
|
|
|
Safe and Secure! posted:Questions about some of his points: quote:And he talks about framing yourself as someone who clearly creates value or reduces costs. How the hell do you do that? I work for a huge, well-known company, but I just write code to store data from a bunch of disparate systems in a single system, and synchronize data from some systems to others. This is neither creating obvious value nor decreasing costs. It's just basic work that needs to be done. Does that mean I should be looking for a new job, even though I make more than I would at a smaller company? Now lets be charitable and assume that the people paying you actually know what they're doing, and that there is a purpose to your job. Maybe because you decrease the costs associated with that data by putting it in one place, instead of consumers having to grab it from a number of different places BAM MOTHERFUCKER you just added value. To be fair I find it easier to talk the adding-value stuff in terms of processes/tooling that I create (and track), but wherever possible you should point out how hiring you specifically will cause their business to make more money.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
shrughes posted:This point can be true, for certain values of "you", possibly including yourself. its certainly truer than point 2
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2014 10:10
|
|
|
Lampsacus posted:I am scared. I'm starting on the road of of CS -> software developer. But I want to travel and backpack. In New Zealand it is traditional to go on an Overseas Experience (OE) so there is some cultural understanding that people take time off work to see the world. This makes sense considering we live on a tiny island in the middle of nowhere.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2014 04:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 07:37 |
|
|
Doghouse posted:Not sure if this is the right thread for this, but it's pretty closely related, so. Do it the way it says to do it so you can learn the advantages and disadvantages
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2014 23:16
|
|