While knowing the standards makes you a better programmer, it's still bad programming practice to write non-excplicit, cryptic code.
I think the boy's initial "I would never write code like this" response is spot on. I also agree with the boy's implied annoyance and "who cares what this badly written program actually does" stance.
These are fairly terrible interview questions. They test knowledge of standards and various obscure behaviour, but it's far more important what kind of code (readable, explicit, maintainable, simple, architected, commented, performant, bug-free, etc.) the person writes. In real life, the boy may actually be a better programmer than the girl. It's just not a good, comprehensive test.
Nevertheless the examples are fun, but I would never ask them in an interview. Interview time is precious and not to be wasted on stuff like this, unless you're interviewing for a compiler job...
EDIT: Most of the above applies to the first, C part of the interview. In the second, C++ part, the stuff the girl says is mostly basic knowledge that is useful on a daily basis.
I think the boy's initial "I would never write code like this" response is spot on. I also agree with the boy's implied annoyance and "who cares what this badly written program actually does" stance.
These are fairly terrible interview questions. They test knowledge of standards and various obscure behaviour, but it's far more important what kind of code (readable, explicit, maintainable, simple, architected, commented, performant, bug-free, etc.) the person writes. In real life, the boy may actually be a better programmer than the girl. It's just not a good, comprehensive test.
Nevertheless the examples are fun, but I would never ask them in an interview. Interview time is precious and not to be wasted on stuff like this, unless you're interviewing for a compiler job...
EDIT: Most of the above applies to the first, C part of the interview. In the second, C++ part, the stuff the girl says is mostly basic knowledge that is useful on a daily basis.