On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 21:26:26 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Yeah, I guess. But take a look at the application form. There isn't a
> whole heap of space there. "I wrote a raytracer" doesn't seem very
> impressive. Did it trace spheres and planes? Or did it do full global
> illumination with physically-correct refraction, light attenuation and
> volumetric sampling? It makes kind of a difference.

So summarize a bit on the projects that impressed you the most ("I've 
written simple raytracers, foobars, and binfizes.").  Supply the code and 
let them evaluate.  Remember that an application isn't a confessional of 
the things that don't work in things you've built, it's a place to talk 
positively about what you've built.

>> Doesn't really matter if it's relevant to the positions they have open
>> (you don't know what they are, do you?).  They're asking about projects
>> you've worked on to get a sense of your capabilities when dealing with.
> 
> I read it as "can this guy actually finish a big project, or will he get
> bored and never finish it?"

So use the DR project because it was finished.  I imagine that given a 
professional goal to complete some of the projects you've started on, 
you'd finish them, but your interests are so varied that it's difficult 
to focus on a personal project for a long time.  I know a lot of people 
like that.

And for people like that, being paid to do what they find interesting is 
a good incentive to finish a project that's been started.

>> The DR project might be a good one.  You'd do well, I think, doing
>> technical writing, and that type of project shows an aptitude for it.
> 
> That's what I'm using. The form is basically filled out and ready to go.

Good. :-)

>> But while you're at it, if there's a place on the application to list
>> things like that
> 
> Click the link at the start of this thread to see the exact form I'm
> filling in.

Yeah, I saw it - you should know that from the next paragraph.

>> (such as the part to provide code samples - you could zip them up and
>> supply them there), include some of the ones like the language stuff,
>> the mini-Mathematica engine, that sort of thing - that shows an
>> aptitude for the sort of thing they look for in coding - but even if
>> you don't end up doing coding, you're demonstrating a knowledge in the
>> area that can tie back to being able to write technical documents about
>> it.  It's much easier to write technical materials if you understand
>> what you're writing about.
> 
> I don't know - is dumping a bunch of Haskell code on them which they
> have no way of compiling going to prove anything? I could be making it
> all up for all they know...

Don't assume what their capabilities are.  You compiled it, they can get 
a compiler.  They may even look at it and say "hey, I've never heard of 
this language before", in which case you get bonus points for introducing 
them to a new language.  (I know it's hard, but resist the temptation to 
reply to this with "well, obviously it's not useful for anything so why 
would they have heard of it?" or something along those lines.)

Like I said, don't do their thinking for them.  They're capable of doing 
that.

Jim

Post a reply to this message