If I compare myself with young c++ developers or older guys (like CSY, Paul..) I can see clear patterns in QQ and GTD.
- QQ and (to a lesser extent) zbs — I’m clearly pulling ahead, sometimes heads and shoulders above them. Some of these guys have wider QQ knowledge but lacks depth. I wrote about “experts” sizing up each other..
- zbs: instrumentation — one of the key areas of improvement for me! However, I can see many of the older guys at RTS aren’t more knowledgeable.
- GTD: paradoxically, the younger guys are more productive than me or older guys.
— Now let’s retrace the gradual breakthrough
In May 2019, I felt I have achieved enough critical-mass on c++ QQ topics. Critical mass is defined by The two acid test questions.
Q1: without a full-time c++ job, but with enough interviews, will my c++ QQ insight/understanding show resilience against churn and memory fading, as in coreJava?
Q2: thick->thin achieved? Not yet, but cross-reference graph is now built up as a defense against fading memory
This java career review provides a valuable context.
What visible progress gave me this level confidence? Recent technical wins show my improved ranking among c++candidates.
- TradeWeb core team
Note I have invested more effort on c++ QQ than java… t-investment: c++now surpassing java
- — now a sample of critical-mass topics, roughly ranked by importance on high-end interviews, mostly at HFT and ibanks
- coding tests
- smart ptr
- heap memory mgmt including new..
- polymorphism including MI #44 posts in the category
- TMP — important at high-end but not HFT
- [e] pthreads + c++11 threads
- [e] sockets
- runtime costs of virtual and heap, as Stroustrup explained
- [e] cache efficiency, compiler optimizations,
- [e] linux
- [e] new innovation directions
- [e] benchmarks involving c++ as Stroustrup explained
- build tools
- [e=ecosystem topics]