Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 16:49:55 -0400
Reply-To: Charles Harbour <charles.harbour@PEARSON.COM>
Sender: "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Charles Harbour <charles.harbour@PEARSON.COM>
Subject: Re: OT: Lines of code per day...
When interviewing folks for programming positions, I provide a complex
problem, and ask them to define how they would approach it. You usually
get a response that is indicative of their programming 'level'--depth of
experience and level of thoughtfulness.
But, for what it's worth, it kinda depends on what you want. Do you want
somebody right out of school, who's great at cutting and pasting, who maybe
doesn't produce the most 'mature' code, but can bang out jobs by the dozen
with little regard to efficiency (either coding or system), or do you want
somebody who takes 3 weeks to produce some of the most beautiful, reusable,
robust code that delivers the same results that the rookie could have
banged out in an afternoon (albeit with less robustness, no comments,
etc)? What is the nature of the work presented? Do you have complex
problems that need sophisticated solutions? Or do you need somebody who
can whip things out quickly and not-so-cleanly? Should both programmers be
measured by the same yardstick?
My 2 cents.