The first question was JavaScript scoping:

var x = 9;
var module = {
x: 81,
getX: function() {
this.x = 10
return this.x; }
};

module.getX(); // nr 1 - 10

var retrieveX = module.getX;
retrieveX(); // nr 2 - 9

var boundGetX = retrieveX.bind(module);
boundGetX(); // nr 3 - 81

The second question was FizzBuzz again:

Question

The first question was JavaScript scoping: 

var x = 9; 
var module = {
  x: 81,
  getX: function() { 
   this.x = 10
   return this.x; }
};

module.getX(); // nr 1 -> 10

var retrieveX = module.getX;
retrieveX();   // nr 2 -> 9


var boundGetX = retrieveX.bind(module);
boundGetX(); // nr 3 -> 81


The second question was FizzBuzz again:

Anoniem · Accepted Answer

I don't believe the live coding session took you 15 minutes ;-)

Anoniem · Answer

FYI, all of them return 10

Anoniem · Answer

JavaScript scoping:
First they asked what is nr 1 was and I was to quick and said it was 81 as I didn't see the added an ugly this.x = 10 in the getX function but I immediately changed my answer. In nr 2 I was asked what value it was and I said undefined as this.x is not defined on that scope, but that was incorrect because this === window in the global context of a browser. However that is correct but this is an ugly trick and clearly either promoting bad habits or meant as a trap which doesn't prove anything. 

FizzBuzz:
Which I answered in under two minutes using strings and the interviewer had a preference of writing FizzBuzz in Arrays and joining using .join(). This is basically just a style preference and again doesn't prove anything. 

They didn't even look at my github profile or what I had done in the past. So basically I think their dev recruitment process is severely flawed.

Typeform

Sollicitatievraag bij Typeform

Antwoorden op sollicitatievragen

Gevolgde bedrijven

Vacatures