Looking at a candidate's project on github

>looking at a candidate's project on github
>shitty README
>no documentation
>terrible code
>no unit tests

>he has unit tests but the code coverage is crap and the build failed
>he has documentation but it's out of date
>he has a README but it's written like an English essay instead of a readme
>his code is beautiful but doesn't work

>hiring new employees
>a big stack of CVs on my desk
>throw half of them in the trash because i don't want unlucky people working for me

Hired

Where can I get code reviews from non-memesters? If I post in /dpt/ they just ignore my projects since the guys don't program.

stackexchange, reddit

>stackexchange
I'm assuming they'd close my thread for "not a question".
>reddit
Unironically didn't think about it, I'll have a look.

Where and when was this image taken?

I only use github for dicking around with personal projects that I don't want other people to see (too poor for private repos). What do I tell employers if they ask me if I have a github?

Stack exchange has a code review thingy

What did he mean by this?

Get two githubs, one for normie and one for private.

Literally me trying to get an internship this summer with a shit-tier python webapp (I didn't get it lol)

>uploading your precious code to some shithub website

>no unit tests
Should there be unit tests on personal projects? What the fuck.

>precious code
All of my tools are released under the GNU license :^)

Depends how large the project is.

Fucking smart.

me irl

Go to the codereview stackexchange, thats literally its purpose for existing

Can somebody explain what is an unit test? Didn't really grasp the concept by searching. So it tests if "units" (e.g functions) of your code are working as intended?

Basically, yes. The idea is that it is much more manageable to debug when you can isolate individual units.

My code doesn't have any bugs, though. Why should I preemptively plan for bugs instead of proactively not committing bugs?

How can you do unit tests?

We have many projects with varying degrees of size and complexity. And one in our team went full on the scrum and unit test bandwagon.
We noticed that both only make sense if the project is suitably large. Of course the rudiments of scrum nearly always make sense,
but it's just a waste of time to do full blown scrum and unit tests on every kind or project.

Took a while until he understood that though.

It checks if a function or method:
1) Returns correct results
2) Has correct side effects - calls other functions, modifies parameters correctly

>looking at a candidate's project on github

People put shitty projects on GitHub because HR started looking for it as a way to screen candidates, but HR obviously can't critique code.

Don't h8, gotta eat.

>be engineer
>have a dedicated office application engineer that creates and maintains some handy tools
>open one of the tools that look useful
>open the documentation
>it's just a one page pdf that reads "do you really need documentation?"
>mfw

>Employer is an animeposter
Dodged a bullet there

>he writes unit """"tests""""
>he doesn't mathematically prove correctness of his procedures

when industry will stop writing software like a fucking troglodytes

> regurgitating jokes
i think i'm going to be sick

>Unit Test: A test written by a programmer for the purpose of ensuring that the production code does what the programmer expects it to do. (For the moment we will ignore the notion that unit tests also aid the design, etc.)

>he spends time writing unit tests when he could have just spent that time reading the code more carefully

>having applicants even have github
like 90% of the applicants I have seen don't have a github and if they do it is just to put projects from University classes.

what if it's a small bot or something that has like 2 functions? can i even justify taking the time to write them?

There's not a good reward for people who code after-hours.

Any salary that some deeply passionate programmer can make is trumped by management and management's boss. And they might even have less technical skill.

It's a whole lot of effort for pennies.

Either two githubs or go for bitbucket, you can make unlimited private repositories with free plan.

People keep implying in these threads that the people reviewing your app are looking at your github and other portfolios to see if you'll do free work in off hours. That's not the case. They look at it to see what your code looks like, what kind of experience you have, and if you have enough passion for your work to do it as a hobby as a lot of programmers do. It's like an art portfolio. It's a collection of relevant works you did that showcase your talents and past achievements so they know what you like and what you're capable of. How is this so often misconstrued?

dude, at lease credit it

The joke is older than that post even.

>terrible code
Only point that's remotely relevant.

My code is self-documenting.

Like that shit even matters when you have the right connections.

So find the original post

It's older than the internet.

>functional programming

yeah but there are a couple problems with that.

1. People are evaluated by the amount/quality of OPEN SOURCE code they produce on their Github.

2. Github has become a buzzword, If HR ask you if you have a Github and you tell them "no but I do have a bitbucket/gitlab/etc portfolio" they'll be too retarded to know what that means and mark the 'no' checkbox. Same goes for if you use any other version control that isn't git.

3. Following the first point the main advantage of open source is contribution to other projects but, recruiters mainly care about self made projects even though collaborating on bigger projects is probably a better indicator of a persons code quality (and what the point of Github and other public repositories are in the first place).

stackexchange has a code review board

I wrote the original version of this. I gave user permission to use it. Now fuck off you aspie nonce