Programming Passion and the FizzBuzz Madness

Of late there have been lots of buzzing around with FizzBuzz in many of the programming blogs. It all started with Imran on Tech posing the following fizzbuzz question to interview developers who grok coding ..

Write a program that prints the numbers from 1 to 100. But for multiples of three print “Fizz” instead of the number and for the multiples of five print “Buzz”. For numbers which are multiples of both three and five print “FizzBuzz”.

The programming community took it up from there and started a deluge of self proclamation trying to establish the most efficient way of FizzBuzzing. Have a look at the comments section of all these blogs - passionate programmers have used all *official* languages to get their version of FizzBuzz going.

And the madness continues .. someone positions FizzBuzz as the the programming task of choice for discriminating hackers. And guess what ? One hacker responded with a Ruby code interpreting Prolog interpreting Lisp interpreting Lisp solving FizzBuzz.

The intent of the initial post was definitely to bring into light some of the concerns and issues that interviewers face hiring good programmers. The community responded otherwise, as Giles Bowkett aptly mentions ..

if you were absurdly cynical, you might expect programmers to start coding FizzBuzz in every language from Haskell to SQL, and even to start holding FizzBuzz coding contests.

Are programmers by nature too passionate ? I guess yes, and that is why we find such madness in the community when someone throws in some problem which has a programming smell. But is this passion justified ? Now, this is cynical, since you can never justify passion. But I think we would have been much more pragmatic focusing on the main problem that Imran on Tech had raised - the issue of hiring good programmers through a pragmatic process of interviewing. Is asking candidates to solve screening programming assignments the right way to judge a programmer in an interview ? We follow these practices rampantly, we eliminate candidates through FizzBuzz problems, yet many of the software projects fail because of bad programming and inefficient programmers. Isn't it time we step back and introspect ? Have a look at this heartfelt critique of the FizzBuzz screening question .. (reference from RaganWorld)