> I still don't trust the "Most coders can't do FizzBuzz" meme that generally accompanies the flowery you're-a-special-snowflake-talk.
Well of course, such talk misses the point. A "Coder" who can't do Fizzbuzz isn't a coder, or a programmer, or a hacker, or a computer scientist. It's a negative test, if you can't do it, then your not ready for a real programming gig yet.
I would wager a combination of bad curriculum, theory over actual programming, and people who followed the sunk costs fallacy to a career they didn't want.
Well of course, such talk misses the point. A "Coder" who can't do Fizzbuzz isn't a coder, or a programmer, or a hacker, or a computer scientist. It's a negative test, if you can't do it, then your not ready for a real programming gig yet.
From http://imranontech.com/2007/01/24/using-fizzbuzz-to-find-dev... (Which appears to be the source of the infamous fizzbuzz question.)
"This sort of question won’t identify great programmers, but it will identify the weak ones. And that’s definitely a step in the right direction."