"...You're a dictionary. That doesn't make you a problem solver." -- This right here.
The static around what you need to know to provide value to the private sector is painfully misleading. We all have our eyes on a handful of online resources (you thought of all of them as you read this article), and there's nothing wrong with that. You are adding value when you come into a company and start solving problems for them.
Spoiler/hot-take alert: with some exceptions, of course, they don't care how you do it.
I'm not advocating bad practices, I'm advocating no one be discouraged by what you're told you need to know. Being able to think-through-a-problem, communicate, and work well with others goes a lot further than having a single snippet of any programming language memorized.
I love that "hot take". Too many times, the interviewer/screener cares about all that nitpicky detail because they're just trying to find a way to logically eliminate candidates until they're left with only one. But your employer probably couldn't care less if you use async/await or .then()/.catch() (or 1000 other nitpicky possibilities about how to write an app).
I'm sure you already get where I'm coming from, but it's not as if being a "dictionary" is a bad thing. Some of the sharpest coders I knew where guys who had vast swaths of minutiae memorized. But people so often fail to appreciate the difference between correlation and causation.
Those super-sharp coders weren't amazing code jockeys because they had memorized all that crap. They managed to memorize all that crap - over a span of years - as a side-effect of the fact that they're amazing coders. But just having everything memorized doesn't make you a good coder.
It's kinda like chess. The grandmaster have tons of openings memorized. But they're not grandmasters because they've memorized those openings. The opening memorization came as a side effect on the road to becoming a grandmaster. If you were trying to evaluate the skills of an unknown chess player, it would be silly to just quiz them on their knowledge of openings. I've actually met numerous very-low-level chess players who have an impressive command of openings... but they're still very weak chess players.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
"...You're a dictionary. That doesn't make you a problem solver." -- This right here.
The static around what you need to know to provide value to the private sector is painfully misleading. We all have our eyes on a handful of online resources (you thought of all of them as you read this article), and there's nothing wrong with that. You are adding value when you come into a company and start solving problems for them.
Spoiler/hot-take alert: with some exceptions, of course, they don't care how you do it.
I'm not advocating bad practices, I'm advocating no one be discouraged by what you're told you need to know. Being able to think-through-a-problem, communicate, and work well with others goes a lot further than having a single snippet of any programming language memorized.
I love that "hot take". Too many times, the interviewer/screener cares about all that nitpicky detail because they're just trying to find a way to logically eliminate candidates until they're left with only one. But your employer probably couldn't care less if you use
async/awaitor.then()/.catch()(or 1000 other nitpicky possibilities about how to write an app).One more note on this:
I'm sure you already get where I'm coming from, but it's not as if being a "dictionary" is a bad thing. Some of the sharpest coders I knew where guys who had vast swaths of minutiae memorized. But people so often fail to appreciate the difference between correlation and causation.
Those super-sharp coders weren't amazing code jockeys because they had memorized all that crap. They managed to memorize all that crap - over a span of years - as a side-effect of the fact that they're amazing coders. But just having everything memorized doesn't make you a good coder.
It's kinda like chess. The grandmaster have tons of openings memorized. But they're not grandmasters because they've memorized those openings. The opening memorization came as a side effect on the road to becoming a grandmaster. If you were trying to evaluate the skills of an unknown chess player, it would be silly to just quiz them on their knowledge of openings. I've actually met numerous very-low-level chess players who have an impressive command of openings... but they're still very weak chess players.