The questions are not all entirely asinine, although the "correct" answers indicate some confusion on the part of the testers. More horrible, though, is that flash intro...
I think you're forgetting about pseudo-hashes (but, of course, everyone should be forgetting about pseudo-hashes!)
Ah, never bothered to actually learn about pseudo-hashes. Mark one up for laziness!
Maybe hiring someone to maintain some nasty code is exactly what they're going after. Of course, that doesn't jive with their claim of looking for the best Perl hackers. And why on earth would anyone put up a test like this claiming to be looking for the best-of-the-best? I know a few places I could go where I couldn't throw a rock without hitting one. And that Flash intro was just horrid. It must have been written by the winner of their test to find the world's best Flash composer.
-- The great thing about multitasking is that several things can go wrong at once.
Maybe hiring someone to maintain some nasty code is exactly what they're going after.
I don't think so. I've been in touch with them, and even corrected 10 of their questions with various levels of LART application. They fully believed (a) their questions were satisfactory, albeit hard and (b) they weren't trying to trick anyone with impossible questions.
I presume they've updated the quiz by now, but I haven't had time to go back to check.
Hah, got a mail from them now - because of my "excellent performance in the quiz", they want to offer me a "Hot Perl Job in Bangalore". Of course this offer was sent with 11 visible adresses in the To-field.
It's an interesting way to hire people, but maybe saying upfront that the job's in India would be smart;-)
Email in full:
Dear Friend,
Thank you for taking on the Perplexer at www.hiddenPerl.com. We would like to congratulate you on your excellent performance in the quiz.
wow (Score:1)
rjbs
I found two without answers (Score:1)
$p = [ { a => 1, b => 2, c => 3 }, “ant”, “bat”, “cat” ];Which of the following expression gives the value cat ?
$p[3]
$p->{c}
$p->[4]
$p->{bat}
$p->[3] would be correct, and
%x = qw(C Ritchie Perl wall C++ Stroustrup); print @x{C, C++}Error : should use % instead of @ in print function
Displays Stroustrup
Displays Ritchie
Displays Ritchie Stroustrup
This doesn't compile, but of course, they didn't use " in a bunc
You forgot pseudo-hashes (Score:1)
$p->{c}is correct.Re:I found two without answers (Score:2)
I think you're forgetting about pseudo-hashes (but, of course, everyone should be forgetting about pseudo-hashes!)
Re:I found two without answers (Score:1)
Re:I found two without answers (Score:1)
The great thing about multitasking is that several things can go wrong at once.
Re:I found two without answers (Score:2)
I presume they've updated the quiz by now, but I haven't had time to go back to check.
Very broken (Score:1)
1) None of the above. The answer is "\n", unless strict is on.
6) None of the above. The answer is $p->[3] or $$p[3].
11) Both b and c are right answers
14) None of the above. The answer is "\n" because "perl\n" is not equal to "perl"
15) Syntax error: Can't modify constant item in postincrement (++) at -e line 1, near "C++"
Re:Very broken (Score:2)
Re:Very broken (Score:2)
They randomize the question order every time you take it.
Re:Very broken (Score:2)
Consider the source (Score:2)
The quiz sucks because the author sucks because only somo
Camel alert (Score:1)
job offer! (Score:1)
It's an interesting way to hire people, but maybe saying upfront that the job's in India would be smart ;-)
Email in full: