832
reason enough to fail the interview (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
A picture of Edsger Dijkstra with a concerned face and the following text on top: How software engineers look at your code when you solve the problem using two tables — instead of using the Maxwell-Ross-Karmakar algorithm, which is marginally optimal in ordered sets bijectable to the exponential curve
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

All of which the physicist can trivially account for, control and variable test around, should the requested question be updated to require it.

The requested question did not include "In all possible scenarios", thus determining the volume of the sphere via physics calculation at the most average of conditions, is the most correct valid solution, absent further requirement parameters.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    You're right in terms of grading a student's homework or whatever.

    In research/publication/career these assumptions must be stated unless given.

    But I was responding to:

    The physicist’s answer would be correct anywhere, no matter the temperature or density of the fluid.

    Which includes non-standard conditions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •