[DFW.pm] Homework for the list, and for Oct 08 meeting
Robert Flach
robert.flach at webtooldeveloper.com
Thu Sep 11 12:31:50 PDT 2014
Tommy,
Run the code without the STDOUT, then run it with. It's a simple
trick to avoid having perl interpret the ternary grouping parenthesis as
print function delemiting parenthesis. TIMTOWDI: You could also wrap
the entire thing in parenthesis, you could skip the ternary and do your
printing in an if. You could move the ternary to an assignment
statement to $val just before printing plain old $val (what I would
probably normally do if I weren't being creative), etc. But the STDOUT
is definitely required for the code as is ;-)
Robert Flach
*Web Tools*
On 9/11/2014 1:37 PM, Tommy Butler wrote:
> "print STDOUT" ???????
>
> You did that. On purpose?
>
> This raises so many questions :-P
>
> -- Tommy Butler
>
> On Sep 11, 2014, Robert Flach <robert.flach at webtooldeveloper.com> wrote:
>
> Well, it sounds like it was a fun meeting. I'm sorry I missed
> it! I personally will occasionally use the FizzBuzz test when
> interviewing applicants though I usually use more complicated
> coding challenges. Maybe I could share one or more of those
> sometime as a "more advanced" challenge. In the meantime, scroll
> down for my solution and for the things I look for when evaluating
> a fizzbuzz...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl
> use strict;
> use warnings;
> my $x = 0;
> while($x++ < 100)
> {
> my $val = "";
> $val .= ( $x % 3 == 0 ) ? "fizz" : "";
> $val .= ( $x % 5 == 0 ) ? "buzz" : "";
> print STDOUT ( $val ? $val : "$x" ) . "\n";
> }
> Things I look for in a fizz buzz:
> 1. (Dealbreaker) Is the code readable. (I have a pretty loose
> definition of readable and it definitely doesn't require comments,
> but if it's unintelligible it's a dealbreaker )
> 2. (Dealbreaker) Will it produce correct output barring any minor
> syntax errors i.e. is the algorithm valid.
> 3. If doing a separate test for fizzbuzz have they optimized to a
> mod 15 check.
> 4. Can they (with prompting if needed) make the leap to realizing
> they can concat the two tests to produce the combined value
> without a separate test
> 5. If using real code: will it compile.
> 6. If using real code: will it compile without errors or warnings
> (e.g. for perl can I stick a use strict;use warnings; at the top
> of it.
>
> Things I never care about in a fizzbuzz:
> 1. Do they know the correct operator for modulus (as long as they
> know modulus is possible)
> 2. while vs for vs. foreach, variable initialization, ternary vs.
> if, perl vs c vs (insert your favorite language argument here)
> 3. correct formatting of output (e.g. I don't mind if they forget
> to newline it, nor do I give extra points for printf )
> 4. error handling, supporting input arguments, etc. (this is an
> algorithm test, not a coding practices test and a coding practices
> test is unsuitable for the time available)
>
> Things somewhat unrelated to fizzbuzz but discernible in some way
> related to the fizzbuzz tests that I definitely care about/give
> extra credit for.
> 1. Do they confirm or clarify the requirements with me in some way
> e.g. "When you say instead prints fizz buzz or fizzbuzz do you
> mean that you don't want it to print those numbers at all and only
> print the alternate text, or would you like it to always print the
> numbers and print that in addition for those meeting the
> requirements?" It doesn't matter if their question is clearly
> answered in the requirements as written, restating the
> requirements as a question is a hugely valuable (and often
> undervalued) developer skill.
> 2. Similarly to number 1, do they ask questions about what I want
> in the solution (e.g. all those things in numbers 2-4 under things
> I never care about above) I don't care about those things (for the
> test; very different standard for "real" code), but many people
> do, and I DO care about your ability to realize that and your
> willingness to adjust your style accordingly.
> 3. I will always ask for some modification of the code
> afterwards. I care a lot about how they respond to that request,
> whether it is a request to make it do something different, to
> change the styling, to comment it, etc.
> 4. If using pseudo code does their pseudo code look like a human
> language construction or is it just code with invalid syntax.
> (Either way, once they are done I will almost always ask for
> something that would compile/interpret correctly in some language.
>
>
>
>
> Robert Flach
> *Web Tools*
> On 9/11/2014 12:15 PM, Lisa Cloutier wrote:
>> Solution below:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> my $x = 1;
>>
>> while ($x <= 100)
>> {
>> if (($x % 3 == 0) && ($x % 5 == 0))
>> {
>> print "FizzBuzz\n";
>> }
>> elsif ($x % 3 == 0)
>> {
>> print "Fizz\n";
>> }
>> elsif ($x % 5 == 0)
>> {
>> print "Buzz\n";
>> }
>> else
>> {
>> print "$x\n";
>> }
>> $x++;
>> }
>>
>> I minorly "cheated" in that I didn't know the sign in Perl for
>> "mod" but had read Bob's email previously (before learning about
>> the challenge) and realized what he was doing with the % sign.
>> Had I been in an interview I probably would have used every
>> special character in turn until I figured out the symbol for mod.
>>
>> So I guess I can "program my way out of a wet paper bag" as this
>> website <http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?FizzBuzzTest> proclaimed about
>> the FizzBuzz test.
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:42 AM, John Fields <wigthft at gmail.com
>> <mailto:wigthft at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Firstly, I want to thank John Dexter for his Docker
>> presentation, showing how to encapsulate a Mojolicious Web
>> server and application for easy deployment. He got what all
>> presenters get, a free dinner and that warm afterglow from
>> making the world a better place (with more Perl in it). :)
>>
>> I challenged the attendees last night to do the FizzBuzz
>> program. We even had one programmer in attendance that had
>> been asked to do it on a job interview the previous day! We
>> were one day late for him, but hopefully not for you..
>>
>> Http://rosettecode.org/wiki/FizzBuzz
>>
>> Don't cheat.. Yourself. Do it from scratch before looking at
>> other's solutions. We will pick 2 more, with increasing
>> difficulty with one per week. Also new member Andy Sohn will
>> offer a short challenge and demonstrate answers live at the
>> next Mongers.
>>
>> So send in your code, and be as creative as you can!
>> TIMTOWTDI is a strength after all. :)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> John and Tommy
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dfw-pm mailing list
>> Dfw-pm at pm.org <mailto:Dfw-pm at pm.org>
>> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/dfw-pm
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dfw-pm mailing list
>> Dfw-pm at pm.org
>> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/dfw-pm
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Dfw-pm mailing list
> Dfw-pm at pm.org
> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/dfw-pm
>
>
> -- Sent with *K-@ Mail
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.onegravity.k10.pro2>*
> - the evolution of emailing.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dfw-pm mailing list
> Dfw-pm at pm.org
> http://mail.pm.org/mailman/listinfo/dfw-pm
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.pm.org/pipermail/dfw-pm/attachments/20140911/f219c4a0/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Dfw-pm
mailing list