## Interview Question — Printing a Palindrome

This was asked recently to me in an interview. Problem is explained in the comments:

```/* GlobalEdx interview Question, Real Life Practicial Code
*
* If a user enters D then write a program to print like this:
*  A B C D C B A
* If user Enters J or Z then it should print till J or Z
* like above. Program should work for every letter of English
*
*/

#include <stdio.h>

void printPalindrome(char c) ;
int getFirstLetter(char* p, char* pc);

int main(int argc, char* argv[]){
char c;
if(2 != argc) {
}
else
{
if(!getFirstLetter(argv[1], &c)) printPalindrome(c);
else printf("You did not enter a character. Enter uppercase character \n");
}
return 0;
}

/* If you get more than letter. Just pick up the first letter
*
*/
int getFirstLetter(char* p, char* pc) {
char temp = *p;

/* What if user puts an int or double, here we handle that ? */
if( ((temp >= 'A') && (temp <= 'Z')) ) {
*pc = temp;
return 0;
}
else return 1;
}

void printPalindrome(char c) {
char t;

for(t='A'; t != c; ++t) printf("%c, ", t);
for(; 'A' != t; --t)     printf("%c, ", t);
printf("%c\n", t);
}
```

OUTPUT:
[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall -Wextra palindrome.c
[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out BA
A, B, A
[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out D
A, B, C, D, C, B, A

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out 0
You did not enter a character. Enter uppercase character

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out 0*
You did not enter a character. Enter uppercase character

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out {
You did not enter a character. Enter uppercase character
[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$

## What does a Software Company need ?

I thought of making this part of my cover-letter but I decided to put it here instead on my blog:

One, I have 5 years and 3 months of experience primarily in C & Linux/UNIX and secondarily in C++, TCP/IP, SIP, Asterisk PBX & FreeSWITCH, out of which 4 years and 6 months were for writing code all day long. I have gone through what a typical programmer/coder using C and C++ languages goes through e.g. crashes, segfaults, undefined behaviors (which actually look very well defined), core dumped etc. etc. Such experiences makes a person mature over time and his way of looking at, writing & designing software changes at least by 180 degrees. And a little bit sensible programmer becomes way better at thinking when he is not in front of editor/compiler because programming/coding is about advancing the mind, not just coding. Such kind of person adds value to the company’s software asset.

Two, a software company is not just made of software; it is made of people too. In fact, people are the thing before software comes into the picture. A good attitude of talking to people, understanding  them and looking at their viewpoints diagonally opposite from yours, is required for any stable company, is required to build a healthy work environment.  People are backbone of the company. Actually, if a company loses all of its money and all of its software but still have all of those people who have flexibility, hard-work, creativity, mental-strength, team-work, initiative to solve problems, all of these kinds of skills and behaviors as a part of their character then that company will build itself again as a market leader. Nothing can ever shake such a workplace. Some people have these character traits naturally, some don’t and most who don’t have, never develop them because somehow they get through interview and then put void main() and their C++ new always returns NULL. You definitely need to avoid these kind. Then some who do not have these traits, they develop them as a part of their character, their way of thinking and living.

Three, every programming language, every CPU, every piece of hardware and software and every innovation in technology has come out of some mind, some genius mind and then it was developed with different kinds and levels of thinking  by people from diverse backgrounds and from different cultures. This proves that mind is more important than software, hardware or any technology itself. A developed mind, out-of-the-box thinking mind, a problem solving mind, is what companies need to hire because people with such mind add a lot of value to the company. Those times from 9-5 job are gone. This millennium, this digital-age is the time  of adding-value, creating effective & efficient methods to solve problems, not of doing mundane same-routine work.

These are the few of the reasons why companies like Google have several rounds of interviews to make sure the person fits on all these points.  I may have missed some points but that’s the gist.  I never had any of those myself and I cultivated these qualities as an integral port of my character. I am sure there are more people like me around and software companies can make the best investment into their business by hiring such people.

## HCL Interview

Earlier I wrote about my interview experience with NetCloud Systems Bangalore. Recently I appeared for an interview with HCL Technologies. (HCL Technologies is on the Forbes Global 2000 list.[13] It is among the top 20 largest publicly traded companies in India with a market capitalisation of \$22.1 billion as of May 2015.[14] As of August 2015, the company, along with its subsidiaries, had a consolidated revenue of \$6.0 billion.[5]  — Source: Wikipedia )

Interviewer was quite younger than me. He asked me to write a program using a singly linked list where he wants to remove Nth element counting from last node you added. e.g if you added 10 elements in the list then 7th element from end is 4th element you added in beginning, hence 4th should be removed. If 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10 are the elements you added then “./a.out 7” should remove 4 not 7.

I told him I can use singly list as stack where elements are always added in reverse order. From his looks I could make out he could not understand what I just said. So I asked him if can I use any method,he replied that I should use pointers and gave  a paper and pen to write. This is the full-fledged code with all the checks and added command-line input and string conversion etc. but algorithm/logic/data is exactly same I wrote there and he said this code will not remove 7th from end but 5th from end.   This is wrong code. I was shocked to hear that. Loot at it yourself and see the output:

```/* HCL Interview Question (2017)
*
* A singly-linked-list (SLL) program to add nodes to SLL and remove Nth node
* from the end
*
* e.g Add 10 nodes to a SLL & remove the 7th node starting from the end
* 7th node from end is 4th node you added while building SLL
*
* I am using a Stack (LIFO). Last node (the end) is always the latest. So, we can
* go down from there easily. The interviewer said it will not work.
* Worked fine for me 🙂
*
***/

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include 				<limits.h>

struct node {
long nn;
struct node* next;
};

struct StPtr {
long tn; /* totoal number of nodes */
};

struct StPtr* st;

void print_diagnostics(void);
void printStack(void);
void convert_to_long(long*, long*, const char*, const char*);
void removeNode(long, long);

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
if(3 != argc) {
print_diagnostics();
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}

st = malloc(sizeof*st);
if(NULL == st) {
printf("Out of Memory\n");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}

st->tn = 0;
long t = 0, r = 0;
convert_to_long(&t, &r, argv[1], argv[2]);
printStack();
removeNode(t, r);
printStack();

return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

void removeNode(long num, long rem) {
if((0 >= num) || (0 >= rem) || (rem > num)){
printf("Nothing to remove\n");
}
else {
long i = (t->nn - rem) + 1;
/* IF we ar eremoving the head */
st->tn--;
printf("Removing node#: %ld \n", i);
free(t);
}
else {
while(i != t->nn) {
prev = t;
t = t->next;
}
prev->next = t->next;
printf("Removing node#: %ld \n", i);
st->tn--;
free(t);
}
}
}

void addNodes(long num, long rem) {
if((0 >= num) || (0 >= rem) || (rem > num)){
}
else {
for(long i = 1; num >= i; ++i) {

struct node* p = malloc(1 * (sizeof *p));
if(NULL == p) {
printf("Out of memory, will not add node\n");
}
p->nn = i;
p->next = NULL;
st->tn++;
}
else {
p->nn = i;
st->tn++;
}

}
}
}

void convert_to_long(long* num, long* rem, const char* numptr, const char* remptr) {
errno = 0;  /* To distinguish success/failure after call */
char* endptr;
long temp = strtol(numptr, &endptr, 0);
if( ((0 == temp) && (0 == strcmp(numptr, endptr)) && (errno == ERANGE))
|| ((LONG_MAX == temp) && (ERANGE == errno)) ) {
*num = 0;
*rem = 0;
}
else {
*num = temp;
temp = strtol(remptr, NULL, 0);
if( ((0 == temp) || (LONG_MAX == temp)) && (ERANGE == errno) ) {
*num = 0;
*rem = 0;
}
else { *rem = temp; }
}
}

void print_diagnostics(void) {
printf("Invalid Number of Args\n");
printf("Provide 2 arguments:\n");
printf("\t1st arg is number of nodes\n\t2nd arg is nuber of node to be removed\n");
}

void printStack(){
for(t = st->head; t; t = t->next) {
printf("%ld, ", t->nn);
}
printf("\n\t---> Total %ld nodes\n", st->tn);
printf("\n======================================\n\n\n");
}

```

OUTPUT:
[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ gcc -std=c99 -pedantic -Wall -Wextra ll.c
[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out 10 7
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1,
—> Total 10 nodes

======================================

Removing node#: 4
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 3, 2, 1,
—> Total 9 nodes

======================================

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out 10 5
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1,
—> Total 10 nodes

======================================

Removing node#: 6
10, 9, 8, 7, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1,
—> Total 9 nodes

======================================

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out 10 1
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1,
—> Total 10 nodes

======================================

Removing node#: 10
9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1,
—> Total 9 nodes

======================================

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$ ./a.out 1 10

—> Total 0 nodes

======================================

Nothing to remove

—> Total 0 nodes

======================================

[arnuld@arch64 programs]\$

I don’t understand how could he say this code will not remove the Nth node from end , code behaves fine. May be he never wrote a Stack in his life. I did another mistake by trying to explain him that Stack is an implementation of a linked list and he shrugged it off. He asked me to write it using some other method (he meant another algorithm) but explain to him first and I did and he said same words again that this new method will not work either. Then I told him, there are several ways you can approach the problem that is why so many algorithms (methods 😉 ) exist and is there any specific method he is thinking of ?   He told me that he is done with me and I can leave for the day  🙂

After coming out I saw on the doors in capital letters, “ODC” was written. That means Offshore Development Center. Most of the ODCs in Indian companies are service based, there is not much development/coding involved. Companies in India, get freshers in a mass based campaigns from colleges and put them on work because they are dirt cheap to get when it comes to economy. These freshers have never worked before and most of engineering colleges here have non-ISO conforming compilers and code in their CS textbooks too does not conform to any ISO/ANSI standard. They have learned C and C++ using such resources, so it is expected that they wont know what is the definition of C language and how do ISO conforming compilers and non-forming compilers behave and what it costs in terms of bugs and maintenance.

## Death of comp.object

Tags: , , , , ,

If you are passionate about programming then you must have discussed about programming on some Newsgroup. It is really sad to see that current generation of programmers have never heard of something called USENET or a Newsgroup. Even programmers with half a decade of experience in OOP have never heard of comp.object and this is exactly the place where I learned the foundations of Object-Oriented methodology. As of 2015, comp.object is dead and full of spam, almost no useful post from couple of years, useful in the sense where some experienced OO practitioners have discussed something very fundamental and basic related to the OO Methodology. There were people like H.S.Lahman, Uncle Bob, Daniel T, Jerry Coffin, Philip and S. Perryman (and of course never forget anti-OO-zealot “topmind”). There were several others but I can only recall back few.

To tell you the truth, I never hates OOP as much as “topmind” hates OOP, I hated the very word “object” but that all changed when I started hanging on comp.object. I made very few posts and all of them were a newbie asking the answers to his questions and doubts but I read a lot of posts, really hell of a lot of threads I read and just like comp.lang.c, comp.lang.c++, comp.lang.lisp it was a very good experience in following the guidance of the folks there. Here is some brilliant advice on how to start learning OO way from one of the experts in the field (H.S.Lahman), I have not edited his advice, do not want anyone to miss his original words :), here are the abbreviations to some of the acronyms:

• OT: Object Technology (referring to the entire field based on Object Oriented Thinking)
• OOA: Object Oriented Analysis
• OOD: Object Oriented Design
• OOM:Object Oriented Modelling

> I am new to the field. I have some programming experience. I
> was wondering if anyone could recommend a good book to start.

Alas, OT is a big field and one book probably won’t do it for you.

I would suggest you start with a book on OOA and/or OOD. Such books
generally describe the fundamentals better. But avoid books with a
specific language or ‘UML’ in the title. Those tend to be about
manipulating syntax rather than fundamentals.

Even if you end up using a pure OOP-based process, you should still
trying some UML modeling. That’s because it provides a good expression
of the fundamentals in a very compact manner. In this case a book with
UML in the title is an advantage.

Then you need to deal with OOP. For that you need a book with a
specific language in the title. Probably two books because it is useful
to start “playing” with OT using a “purist” language like Smalltalk.
That will complete the OOA -> OOD -> OOP cycle in the most coherent
fashion. (Alas, the most popular OOPLs have made more compromises with
Turing so the transition is less obvious.) Then you will need a book on
the language de jour if you plan on doing OT professionally.

You’ll notice I didn’t recommend any specific books. In each category
there are lots and most are pretty similar. Since I haven’t read them
all, I can’t even guess which one is actually the best. Just browse
them in a book store and pick the one that seems most readable and
provides the most clarity to you.

There is nothing wrong with me that could
not be cured by a capful of Drano.

H. S. Lahman
h…@pathfindermda.com
Pathfinder Solutions
http://www.pathfindermda.com
blog: http://pathfinderpeople.blogs.com/hslahman
“Model-Based Translation: The Next Step in Agile Development”. Email
Pathfinder is hiring:
(888)OOA-PATH

Such a beautiful explanation, so straightforward and simple advice. If you search the archives of comp.object on net then you will come across much larger information from many intelligent and experienced people. I did read lot of threads and based on that knowledge of mine I started searching more about it and came across few interesting facts and one of them is: OOP is not really about objects . Is that shocking ? You think I must be crazy to suggest that Object Oriented Programming is not about Objects. The only important building-blocks of OOP are two: one is old and other is modern. As per Old thingy, poor Alan Kay, the man who created OOP, OOP is not about objects and in facts Alan Kay regretted using the word “object”. It is about message-passing. As per the modern outlook, OOP is about how objects behave , not how they are constructed or what features they have. Inheritance or Classes are not basic building blocks of OOP.

Proof ?

HI Guys,

A few years ago this was a pretty active NG, it seems to be rather
quiet now and I seriously wonder why?

Is it because:
a. Uncle Bob rarely visits?
b. No one programs in English speaking countries anymore?
c. No one uses OOP much anymore?
d. Everyone moved to a funkier group? If so which one?

I don’t have any real clue what do you guys think (erh, if anyone sees
this)?

Cheers

[by Alvin Ryder]
—————————————————————————

Usenet in general has been on the decline for the past several years,
probably because of the rise of Web based forums. I think that’s part of it.
In addition, some/many of the regulars seemed to have moved on. Also, and
this is nothing personal, I would contend that the activity of this group
over the past 8 years has been somewhat artificially inflated due to
topmind’s involvment. If you do searches on this group regarding a variety
of topics, you’ll run across many monster threads circa 5 or 6 years ago
involving the regs and topmind. As far as OOP in general, maybe it’s reached
the point in which every thing that can be said has been said.

[by Leslie Sanford]

———————————————————————————-

> “Leslie Sanford” wrote:

> Usenet in general has been on the decline for the past several years,
> probably because of the rise of Web based forums. I think that’s part of it.

Sadly. Blogs seem to be taking usenets place.

> In addition, some/many of the regulars seemed to have moved on.
> Also, and this is nothing personal, I would contend that the
> activity of this group over the past 8 years has been somewhat
> artificially inflated due to topmind’s involvment. If you do
> searches on this group regarding a variety of topics, you’ll
> run across many monster threads circa 5 or 6 years ago
> involving the regs and topmind. As far as OOP in general, maybe
> it’s reached the point in which every thing that can be said has
> been said.

Agreed on the later point. OO seems to have reached some sort of
saturation point. The time is getting ripe for the “next big thing”, but
it seems that thing still hasn’t shown its face.

[by Daniel T.]
—————————————————————————————-

> Responding to Ryder…
> A few years ago this was a pretty active NG, it seems to be rather
> quiet now and I seriously wonder why?

I agree with Sanford. I would add that a surprising number of
developers today don’t even know that USENET exists.

However, I would also add the militant proselytizing of the OOP-based
agile crowd. That definitely killed the old OTUG forum Rational ran —
which was busier than comp.object once upon a time — and I think it
contributed here as well.

[by H.S.Lahman]
—————————————————————————————–

> “H. S. Lahman” wrote in message
> I agree with Sanford. I would add that a surprising number
> of developers today don’t even know that USENET exists.

> However, I would also add the militant proselytizing of the OOP-based
> agile crowd. That definitely killed the old OTUG forum Rational ran —
> which was busier than comp.object once upon a time — and I think it
> contributed here as well.

Contributed how ??
I doubt said “crowd” drove anyone away en-masse from the comp.* groups.

OTOH, a lot of them certainly seemed to exit stage left when their claims
were challenged sufficiently often (like giving it but not taking it etc) .

Regards,
Steven Perryman

——————————————————————————————

> Responding to Perryman…
>> However, I would also add the militant proselytizing of the OOP-based
>> agile crowd. That definitely killed the old OTUG forum Rational ran —
>> which was busier than comp.object once upon a time — and I think it
>> contributed here as well.
>
> Contributed how ??
> I doubt said “crowd” drove anyone away en-masse from the comp.* groups.

Bandwidth. Not too long ago this group generated ~100 messages a day,
which takes awhile to sort through. When a lot of those messages are
with the thread subject matter, people decide they just don’t have time
to sort through it all. [On OTUG people were quite specific about why
they were quitting and there was no equivalent of Topmind pulling
people’s chains. The agile crowd learned from that and aren’t as
obnoxious here, but the basic bandwidth problem remains.]

When the fraction of that 100 messages/day that are feeding the P/R
troll or are about OOP-based agile advocacy approach 50% or so, the
useful information content of the forum becomes greatly diminished and
it ceases to be worth the trouble to sort it out. (Putting people in
kill files doesn’t work well because occasionally they have something
useful to say and it also trashes the context of the messages responding
to them.)

[by H.S.Lahman]
—————————————————————————————–

I’ve learnt more from this NG about software development than any
other single source, but after a while people just sit in the same old
entrenched position (myself probably included), noone ever admits to
having learnt anything new, or being wrong, so it fails to become a
positive experience, it’s just another endless avalanche of ranting
and nay saying….(myself probably included).

[by Mark Nicholls ]

——————————————————————————————

> Responding to Parker…

> I don’t know. “Object Oriented” as a tag line has been vanishing for
> some time. It wouldn’t help you to publish a book anymore to have OO
> in the title. I don’t see any conferences anymore with OO in the
> name. Vendors have long since stopped talking about OO. All the so-
> called OO “methodologies, the Shlaer and Mellor, the Booch etc. appear
> to be gone, and no one seems to miss them. The OO databases are
> largely gone, no one talks about OO operating systems anymore.
> “Executable UML” is mostly gone. OO was part of one giant hype cycle
> for a while, but it’s over, and now the hype has moved onto other
> things, today it’s SOA. And just like not all of the SOA hype is
> nonsense, only 90 percent, not all of the OO hype was nonsence
> either. We still have the programming languages with support for

I agree there is a lot less marketing hype about OO, but why is that?
How many shops outside of low-level R-T/E and RAD pipeline development
use an OOPL vs. a procedural language or FPL? The reason there isn’t any
it has no direct marketing value. In the early ’80s how many people were
selling tools because they were procedural? They were all procedural so
there was no point in differentiating on that basis.

In addition, if one looks at the technologies de jour that are being
hyped today, like SOA, they are mostly enabled by OO techniques. Even
the most hard-core RAD DBMS tools are climbing all over themselves to
look more OO-like.

I agree OOA/D methodologies are currently on the wane temporarily
because the OOP-based agile crowd is trying to convince everyone that
all you need to know about is OOP. But that bubble is beginning to burst
and I expect OOA/D methodologies to rebound, especially because…

As far as executable UML is concerned, it has “gone” to the major
commercial software houses. There are only two translation vendors from
the ’90s that are still independent as the big houses position
themselves strategically. The 50+% productivity and reliability gains
make translation as inevitable as conversion from BAL to 3GLs was. So
translation isn’t going anywhere; everyone else will be coming to it.

> comp.object became a “soft”
> newsgroup where almost anybody could post how they felt about “getters
> versus setters” or “method versus message”, or “behaviour versus
> data”, or “tell versus ask”. We were told there was theory, but it
> was somewhere else, in a book by Abadi and Cardelli or in some paper,
> but it never seemed to get incorporated into any discussions.

But aren’t those issues fundamental to OOA/D? Don’t the justifications
of those positions represent OO methodological theory?

Unfortunately one problem with comp.object is its schizophrenia. It
combines OOA, OOD, and OOP, which are quite different things. Thus the
type theory of A&D is largely irrelevant to OOA/D discussions while OO
design issues like separation of message and method are irrelevant to
OOP. IMO far too much forum bandwidth was spent on OOP issues. There are
plenty of language and programming forums on USENET where code
refactoring discussions could live. But comp.object is one of the few
software design forums.

[by H.S.Lahman]

## why companies fail to hire good talent

December 27, 2014 at 6:56 pm | Posted in Programming | 1 Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

Recently Net Cloud Systems, Bangalore (INDIA) approached me for interview. They needed someone specialized in C and UNIX and since my last 5 years of industrial experience is full of C, Linux and UNIX, they must have thought I could be a good fit for the company. Gosh! how wrong they were.

I had to appear for an online test to get recruited. Unfortunately, I did not get any call from them after the test, so I got the point that I did not clear the test. That is fine by me, sometimes you win, sometimes you lose. As a computer programmer, as 24×7 coder, I have learned 2 things: 1st, it is always good to accept your own failures and move on with life by improving upon your skills. 2nd thing is the essence of this blogpost.

Net Cloud Systems had few questions as part of C programming test which actually did not belong to C language. IIRC, there were 2 or more questions not related to C language but they were put in the C test. I wrote an email to them, explained what was wrong and how could they correct the mistake and very politely I said it give would be fair if they could provide 2 marks for those questions. I got a very furious and arrogant reply in return. Down here is the full transcript of the conversation with them:

```arnuld uttre 	Tue, Dec 23, 2014 at 7:18 PM
To: hr-necs@netcloudsystems.com
Dear Sirs,```

Recently I gave online C test as a part of the selection process by
Net Cloud Systems. I did not get any call after that which means I did
not clear the test and company is not interested in hiring me but that
is not the subject of this email. This email is about incorrect
questions in the C language test. I wrote one mail earlier about the
same issue (to hr-exec@netcloudsystems.com) but no one replied. Hence
you are receiving this email. Here is the technical issue:

I was given 20 questions in C language and only 18 belonged to C
language, other 2 were not. C language is defined by ISO committee
and this committee publishes the definition of the C language. You
can find the official-draft of the standard online here privided by
ISO committee at their site:

http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/

According to the definition of C language, C language does not have
any function named gcvt(). gcvt() was asked in one of the two
questions. Perhaps, gcvt() is some compiler-extension know to the
person who created the test but that does not come under C language.
And there are more than a bunch of excellent high-quality compilers,
you can write same C language conforming code in all of them but
different programmers use different compilers and that has nothing to
do with C language itself but the C language test provided by you
seems to confuse between the compiler and the language. Like I said,
I skipped over theses 2 questions. I think examiner should have given
me marks for these 2 questions, else it would be unfair. I am
attaching the PDF of the latest standard for your technical team to
look at themselves.

Now it is not just about me, it is about all the
programmers/developers who appear in interviews of Net Cloud Systems,
it will be same way unfair to all of them, not to mention lack of
knowledge on your part. I hope you will look into it. Thanks for

Arnuld Uttre

HR-NECS Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 10:39 AM
To: arnuld uttre
Hi Arnuld,

First of all I would like to say that you could not clear the test.

Their is no mistake in the questions, one should have good and depth knowledge on C and Linux platform only then they can answer the questions.
Please correct your facts first and raise a question. The question that you got in the online test were not repaired by some freshers or 1-2 years of exp person.
So for you knowledge please go through some links below and a attachment.
These type of question in our company are answered by freshers or 1-2 yrs of exp employee.

http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~kev/pp/RESOURCES/cplusplus/ref/cstdlib/gcvt.html
Go to root terminal and type: “man gcvt”

Their are many things that keep coming in C language. It is very vast subject. People who have 10-12 years of exp only on C and Linux platform rate themselves 3.5/5 on C programming. How much would you rate your self ?

Thank you for reading my mail and thank you for your mail.

Regards,
[NAME OF HR HIDDEN]
HR-NECS

wrote:
> Hi Arnuld,
>
> First of all I would like to say that you could not clear the test.
>
> Their is no mistake in the questions, one should have good and depth
> knowledge on C and Linux platform only then they can answer the questions.

Oh my dear Vikas….

First of all I did not mean “no disrespect”, I am just trying to tell
you something which is “not correct” about your test but it seems like
between you and the learning. You can either read my email and do the
search yourself or just simply can get angry and call me a dog:

I got the facts correctly, down here is the proof :

http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~kev/pp/RESOURCES/cplusplus/ref/cstdlib/gcvt.html

You sent me this link. Did you even read that page yourself ? It
says gcvt() is not part of ANSI C:

Portability.
Not defined in ANSI-C, but included in some compilers.

You see the link you sent me itself says, it is not part of C language
but “some compilers” have it and that is what I wrote in my last
email. Hope you trust Microsoft Corporation when it says, gcvt() is
not in C language:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms235405.aspx

Here is the code from the same page and output from an ANSI/ISO
conforming C compiler:

[arnuld@arch64 c \$] cat gcvt.c
/* gcvt example */
#include
#include

int main (void)
{
char buffer [20];
gcvt (1365.249,6,buffer);
puts (buffer);
gcvt (1365.249,3,buffer);
puts (buffer);
return 0;
}

[arnuld@arch64 c \$] gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall -Wextra gcvt.c -lm
gcvt.c: In function ‘main’:
gcvt.c:8:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘gcvt’
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
gcvt (1365.249,6,buffer);
^

[arnuld@arch64 c \$] gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall -Wextra gcvt.c
gcvt.c: In function ‘main’:
gcvt.c:8:3: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘gcvt’
[-Wimplicit-function-declaration]
gcvt (1365.249,6,buffer);
^
[arnuld@arch64 c \$]

> Go to root terminal and type: “man gcvt”

I did dear before you even sent a reply, and it says “LEGACY function,
IS not a POSIX or C function, it WAS a POSIX fumction and It has been
removed back in 2008, just like K&R C is deprecated where we never use
to include any information about function arguments.

> Their are many things that keep coming in C language. It is very vast
> subject. People who have 10-12 years of exp only on C and Linux platform
> rate themselves 3.5/5 on C programming. How much would you rate your self ?

I leave that rating factor upto you now since you can figure it
yourself whether gcvt() is a part of C language or not. You told me
explicitly that test was not created by some freshers. I can agree to
that because in 5 years I have met only 2 programmers who really knew
C language and they were not much experienced but very good at C and
programming in general, better than me. Majority of the software
engineers in India, with many years of experience, do not know much
about basics of C because they learned from college and college books
are just the worse part of the story of C learning. Most never
learned C after college because C is not of much help in
employability. It ain’t their fault, it is the Indian education system
and the industry requirements.

You took it personal than keeping an open mind to understand the
difference between a language, compiler and the environment in which
both language and compiler exist.

Late Dennis M Ritchie. draft of ISO Standard is attached with this
email just like my earlier email, please do read it. Thanks for your
time.

people first, almost half of good habits/practices of software
development/engineering are built on understanding people. Listen to
Google I/0 2009 talk on The Myth of Genius Programmer. May God bless
you

Arnuld

HR-NECS Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 12:59 PM
To: arnuld uttre
Hi,

Lets not take this further.

Thank you for the mail and the valuable information.

Thanks and Regards,
[NAME OF HR HIDDEN]

Well I did exaggerate a bit that I got answer from Late Great Dennis Ritchie‘s students 😉 . Personally, I don’t  know any of Ritchie’s students. I sure as hell learned good amount of programming from great programmers including those who have worked with Dennis Ritchie. I would not have become good at C without their mentoring. One day after this happened, I watched “the myth of genius programmer” talk given in Google I/O 2009 by 2 Google developers: Brian Fitzpatrick and Ben Collins-Sussman. They have talked one very important thing related to the great programmers around the world. They talk about how much important it is be humble, flexible and devoid of ego to become a great (or genius as they call it) programmer. How much it is important to respect your peers and their advice and suggestions when they just walk through your code. It is called peer-review and it is one of the pillars of GNU, Linux, BSD and all Open-Source software communities and they mentioned explicitly in their talk that peer-review happens in google all the time. peer-review is one of the greatest strengths behind the better quality of Open-Source software compared to proprietary software. I never had big ego, on the contrary I have always seen myself as a kind of small and short being and I have listened to knowledgeable programmers half my age. In WIPRO I was on the ODC of MasterCard and I learned more qualities there, I learned being humble, soft and and became more flexible. Not only my teammates but my team manager and project manager were great people too and I think I worked with one of the best people in my professional experience.

Completely opposite to WIPRO, do you see the ego coming out of the email from Net Cloud Systems HRD, and dancing in front of your face. Rather than looking for the facts, this HR person totally closed his mind to new information, the information which could have corrected not only their test questions but could have saved them from future embarrassment from some talented programmer. Arrogance instead of improvement. With this kind of mindset, no company can hire good talent. If a company can not understand that a programmer who knows about the cons-correctness, why int main(void) is better than void main(), is better than an ordinary programmer then you should never work for such company. I thank God I did not clear the test and they did not give me those marks I asked. Otherwise, if they have this much of attitude before hiring I wonder what would happen after one joins the company and gives some different but creative programming idea to solve some serious software problem. A good and talented programmer can not stop the flow of creativity, he would suffocate and die a slow death at a workplace where his ideas are suppressed. In 5 years, I have heard of some companies like this, companies who pay much less amount of money to programmers (freshers mostly) and kill their creative mind by bureaucracy but I never had personal experience with them, now I do. I watched Google I/O talk just next day. I thought it was just a co-incidence but now I think, it was God’s guiding hand telling me to apply for better companies, to look for places where problems are solved with different ideas than egos and where creativity flourishes. You should watch Google Talk, Brian and Ben gave a great talk, it is available at youtube. Programming is about passion and interest. Don’t work for those who can not grasp this, if you want to be a happy-coder.

The Myth of genius Programmer