Actually it’s worse than that. At least wide receivers have to run, whereas I can guarantee you, without fear of contradiction, that no software engineer will ever have to write a binary search after they are hired. It’s like choosing a contractor because they know how to forge and cast steel using coal, iron, an oven and a bellows, when they actually need to know a) the address of the nearest Home Depot b) what to do with the steel once they buy it.

I found this interesting break down of technical interviews. Somebody had posted the link on the SlashDot. /. is this really exuberant misinformation farm by and for programmers and technical geeks. Everyone there seems to know everything about everything even though their actual area of expertise is quite limited. These conditions do provide some entertainment though, and every once and a while an interesting news item. I have never seen them post anything about Bon Jovi though. When I do post something I found on /. I usually post the original link though, not the cringe inducing /. posting out of fear of embarrassment.

• Why The New Guy Can't Code

I agree with a lot about what he has to say, I have had those “how do you code a binary search” type questions, although not that exact one. I would go further and say that the “how do you code a binary search” type questions inspires the sort of not-invented-here syndrome that tends to waste resources. Annoying Cube Neighbour, for example seems to be trying to reproduce what Google is doing for search at a very low level, while everyone else is trying to fix bugs in a product that isn't in the same domain and needs to go out the door quick smart.

I have had enough interviews now that I have gotten over most of the stumbling blocks. I don't mind wearing a tie or maybe a suit anymore, in fact I have noticed that it gives me a bit of a confidence boost, since I am almost always better dressed than my interviewers. I should give a shout out here and say that this is entirely thanks to Lena. Another huge advantage I have, not really in the interview itself, but in the process itself it are my references. I usually have excellent references. I know for a fact that I was their second pick at s-mart until they spoke to my references, when I became the first pick. Also when I was looking for a place to live, my future land-lady-at-the-time told me how highly my “friends”/references thought of me when she offered me the place. That place in Beacon is still amongst my favourite homes. It's a hard pick between it and the homestead in Wyoming though. Anyway, I have some strengths in an interview, beyond at least some technical competence, but I have never quite got used to the idiot questions that people ask in interviews, although to be fair if the roles were reversed, I am not sure what questions I would ask to determine if someone was actually a competent coder.

At my current position I had an interview question about OO-Perl which made me raise an eyebrow because it was so dumb, and also written in an unPerlish way. In retrospect there were lots of warning signs that were just screaming “we don't know Perl”, but then when I interviewed at The Bureau, Mo asked lots of questions that had me rolling my eyes a little, and I think he is quite a good Perl programmer. I feel like I am sort of in the reverse situation of the one described in the article. Nobody at NetCon seems to be able to program easy to read, reusable Perl code. Before you say “haha, easy to read, reusable Perl code is an oxymoron”, let me just remind you that I was spoiled at s-mart and The Bureau, which were well run Perl shops where the code was 99% easy to read and much of it was reusable. At NetCon they also dabble in a number of other technologies. I'm hesitant to pass judgment on the code quality in those areas as I don't have as much experience. If it weren't for the compensation package, I would be looking for a new job right now. My Plan for World Domination™ is still in effect, I still feel like there is a lot of opportunity here, because nobody has yet learned the way of The Onion (that is a reference to Perl, not the satirical newspaper), but it is going to take me a while to crack the code.

As a rule, I hate job interviews. I often feel flustered and end up leaving thinking that I have given a pretty poor impression of my ability to communicate. My job interview with Sydney Uni's Faculty of Dentistry was a complete disaster, and it is still fresh in my mind, unfortunately. So it wasn't with relish that I woke up this morning with the prospect of an interview with my current indirect employer: Company 2. Right now I am a contractor, the primary disadvantage to this is no paid vacation or sick leave; there aren't any advantages that I can think of.

Anyway, to make a long story short, the interview went extraordinarily well to the point that I felt like for the first time ever I hadn't shot myself in the foot in a job interview, and that my poor interview skills for the first time wouldn't be the weak link in my overall application. For the first time, I felt if I don't get the job it is because there is someone out there who applied who is technically more qualified than myself, and I am pretty comfortable with that possibility.