算法面试:两只鹦鹉的对话

3 分•作者: dersoverflow•大约 1 个月前
算法面试:两只鹦鹉的对话 所有孩子都知道鹦鹉会说话。所有成年人都明白鹦鹉只是在重复声音。 你会笑,但这些成年人实际上认为算法面试是一位非常聪明的算法专家试图找出候选人是否在可接受的水平上理解算法的对话…… 那么,有多少 ycombinator.com 的读者成功通过了算法面试?可能数以万计。 那么,有多少人能够理解将排序分解成独立阶段是一项基本发现?零! 零问题和评论:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49314420 附注:你有没有想过并非每个人都有心智模型?但大多数人只是死记硬背现成的答案,而不是理解问题? 我推荐阅读《程序员的石头》https://www.datapacrat.com/Opinion/Reciprocality/r0/index.html ---------------8<--------------- 这门课程的工作源于一个疑问:为什么在软件工程领域,有些人比大多数人有用一个或两个数量级?如果这对砌砖工来说是真的,建筑行业会非常热衷于找出原因。当然,问题在于,你可以拍摄一个砌砖工,然后悠闲地分析正在发生的事情。你甚至看不到优秀的程序员做了什么,而且出于某种原因,他们自己也无法解释其中的区别,尽管他们中的大多数人都希望能够做到。 ---------------8<--------------- 这本书的论点本质上是,所有人都被划分为两个不相交的子集:打包者(Packers)和映射者(Mappers): - 打包者只是记住现成的答案。 - 映射者能够独立思考并找到答案。
查看原文
Algorithm Interview: a conversation between two parrots<p>All children know that parrots can talk. All adults understand that parrots simply repeat sounds.<p>You&#x27;ll laugh, but these same adults actually believe that an Algorithm Interview is a conversation between a very smart algorithm expert who is trying to find out whether the candidate understands algorithms at an acceptable level…<p>So, how many ycombinator.com readers have successfully passed the algorithms interview? Probably tens of thousands.<p>Well, how many of them were able to understand that breaking down sorting into independent stages is a Fundamental Discovery? Zero!<p>Zero questions and comments: https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=49314420<p>P.S. Have you ever thought that NOT everyone has a mental model? But most people just memorize ready-made answers instead of understanding the problem?<p>I recommend reading The Programmers&#x27; Stone https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.datapacrat.com&#x2F;Opinion&#x2F;Reciprocality&#x2F;r0&#x2F;index.html ---------------8&lt;--------------- The work leading to this course was motivated by wondering why, in software engineering, there are some people who are one or two orders of magnitude more useful than most people. If this was true of bricklayers, the building industry would be very keen to find out why. The problem of course, is that one can film a bricklayer, and later analyze what is happening at leisure. One cannot even see what great programmers do, and for some reason they cannot explain what the difference is themselves, although most of them wish they could. ---------------8&lt;---------------<p>In essence, this book argues that all people are divided into two non-intersecting subsets: Packers and Mappers: - Packers just remember ready-made answers. - Mappers are able to think and find answers on their own.