Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!columbia!rutgers!ll-xn!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!umd5!cvl!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Weird C code as test for employment
Message-ID: <7881@mimsy.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 6-Aug-87 09:55:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: mimsy.7881
Posted: Thu Aug  6 09:55:03 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Aug-87 12:45:21 EDT
References: <8634@brl-adm.ARPA>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 19

In article <8634@brl-adm.ARPA> dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) writes:
>I'm sure there are many people who are not dense and have a good grasp
>of C which would fail that test.  Actually, Doug Gwyn was the only
>one to point out the fact that *--*++cpp was wrong, so he's the only
>one who's passed.

*--*++cpp was not wrong; Doug obviously just looked at it and said
`you gotta be kidding'.  The declaration `char ****cpp' *was* wrong,
and a number of people caught this.

As to the test itself, it really was not that hard.  Any time you
have a twisty patch of code, the way to find out what it does is
to work it out yourself.  Once you understand what it does, you
can replace it with something more sensible.  This *is* a useful
skill, and it is conceivable that the test was aimed at finding
those who have that skill.  (But I doubt it :-) .)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7690)
Domain:	chris@mimsy.umd.edu	Path:	seismo!mimsy!chris