You wouldn't torture him. You would just zero the probability of getting an offer. There's no SW house or colleague in his right mind that would want a developer that writes obfuscated and needlessly complex to understand code.
https://github.com/EnterpriseQualityCoding/FizzBuzzEnterpris...
Sometimes I wonder why some dev teams take 10x longer to develop some functionality than what I would consider reasonable.
Then I see code like this.
> How much structure would you like?
top = 100
data = {
3: "fizz",
5: "buzz"
}
for i in range(1, top+1):
output_num = True
for j in data:
if i%j == 0:
print(data[j], end="")
output_num = False
if output_num:
print(i)
else:
print("")
Of course, I just banged this out in a web browser text editor. In PyCharm that better be wrapped in a function at minimum, or a module.
This is something you memorize to try to show off
A playful response to the mind numbing idiocy of fizzbuzz.
1. There are no data members inside X, in this case the size of the structure is 1 byte.
2. main() does nothing.
3. *x = new X[100]() - this requests a new array of 100 elements of type X, at a stage before main() is called.
4. The new[] operator is overloaded in the class, this operator must return the address for the requested array. It returns the address of the empty string object plus 1.
5. For each of the 100 elements, the X() constructor is called, the "this" address for those elements will be the value returned by new[] plus an index from 0 to 99. The X() constructor converts this to a number from 1 to 100 by subtracting the address of the empty string. This is the only UB here, but it works in all major modern compilers since they combine the same strings into one instance.
That's debateable.
1. new[] doesn't return a pointer that is suitable for storage for the objects. Yes the objects are empty (only contain padding), but that doesn't absolve from UB.
2. "" is used at two places, assuming that they refer to the same const char array. This is optimization is allowed, commonly implemented, but not guaranteed.
3. An empty struct having 1 byte size is also implementation defined, although common ABIs specify this. It also wouldn't make sense to implement it differently.
But maybe it is not UB because it is not calculated explicitly by the program, hard to tell
Btw, here's a C++ sample that crashes icc: https://pastebin.com/PiRtZi1t. I haven't reported it because it's funnier this way.
While this code wouldn't be an instant offer, it would be a great solution in my eyes and it would follow hardest questions to qualify a candidate for senior position.
That's my opinion at least. I'm making a hiring decisions in my company.
https://try.fsharp.org/#?code=DYUwLgBAZglgXnARgVwRAdsgthAvAW...