I'm not defending the practice of requiring that a side project be presented. I think that's over the top and wouldn't do it -- however, if a candidate volunteers one, that does give a huge advantage to that candidate.
> Some people code to live, not live to code.
Totally fair. But there are lots of companies who prefer people who code because they love coding over those that do it just for the paycheck, and that's also totally fair.
I love to code, hell, I do it almost 40 hours per week. And I get paid to do it, isn't that cool?
Sometimes a side project catches my eye. But I have more than a singular interest. And kids. And to be honest, when a side project catches my eye, work suffers a bit because those tiny moments I have to fill with thoughts are spent on my side projects rather than work projects.
Oh, I think it is very intentional, and the whole point is to not say it out loud.
If you don't have time to code for "love", you won't have time to jump at unreasonable requests and pull tons of crunch time overtime either.
Given the choice, companies would love to hire someone with no responsibilities outside of work, this is just a legal way of filtering out parents, people with dependents etc
It means that you might have other hobbies that you want to spend time on, or other obligations you have to spend time on, etc.
I like what I do at my job. I would even go as far to say as I love it. I also don't do it for an extra 20 hours a week (beyond the 40 hours I already do for work) because I have other things I love to do too (sometimes more!); quality time with friends, family, my other hobbies, etc.
I can sympathize, but keep in mind most professions expect you to commit to a certain number of hours of continuing education. Often you can convince your employer to let you do this during work hours (or even pay for it!), but not always.
Continuing education credits is pretty far from "bring in a hobby project for code review for this interview".
Is there even a CE credit available for coding up a hobby project (and who from)? Completion of a course, attending a lecture, attending a lunch & learn, etc. are the CE credits I am familiar with (spanning a few different professional bodies).
Sometimes you can declare "self-learning", depending on the order.
But anyways, that's not really my point: My point is just that in professions it's not uncommon to be expected to perform some kind of extracurricular activities related to your job. Often software "engineers" aren't members of a professional order, but I'd argue that the idea still applies. Tbh learning by working on a hobby project is way more appealing to me than watching some PowerPoint presentation...
I don’t understand your view. How do you improve your skill in the craft ? Or learn new technologies ? You wait for your employer to tell you to learn something ? That’s a sure fire way to always be behind the curve.
I don't understand how you reached that conclusion.
If it is a personal interest or hobby, I do it on my own time. If it is something required for work, I do it on company time. If there is a lot of overlap, I do it whenever.
Other than that, I learn and improve like any other person does.
Continuing education credits, which is what started this subthread, is something required by the professional body that my company wants me to be a member of. So they happen on company time and dime.
Employers don't require their employees to be members of a professional order because they think professional orders are nifty- It's because certain jobs are only legally allowed to be performed by a member of said order. If you were a dentist and ran your own clinic, you'd still need to be a member of a professional order (at least in Canada and the US afaik) to practice dentistry legally, which would come with obligations outside of your usual working hours.
Software engineering exists in a sort of gray area where you can often be a professional software engineer without having to be a member of any order, which is great in many ways. But I feel like one could argue that the informal expectation of software engineers to care about software outside of their work is similar to what is expected in other professions with more rigid governing bodies.
>Employers don't require their employees to be members of a professional order because they think professional orders are nifty
I didn't say they do it for nifty-ness. At risk of repeating myself again: if it is a requirement of my position, I get my employer to pay for it. Why it is a requirement doesn't matter to me.
If you want to pay for and do continuing education things on your own time and dollar, I'm not going to stop you.
>But I feel like one could argue that the informal expectation of software engineers to care about software
I didn't say I don't care. I just have plenty of other things that I care about that take priority when I am not working (spending time with my family, friends, doing other hobbies, etc.).
But....
>Bring a side project, show us how it works.
What do you do if someone doesn't have a side project (or want their side project to be reviewed by someone they don't know)?
Some people code to live, not live to code.