Because we don't want to test how to implement a Promise but their usage.
That would not stop anyone from asking you how Promises could be implemented, but that would fall out of the scope of the warmup. It would be a more challenging test for a more advanced scenario.
Again, "moving the goalposts" -- "we don't want to test how to implement a Promise but their usage". Just substitute "Array.prototype.reverse" or "Array.prototype.reduce" and then re-consider your prior arguments and whether what you had suggested "would fall out of the scope" of the warmup.
So far I think you've been very unreasonable/illogical. These are not good traits in a developer/developer-interviewer and I now know beyond a doubt there is no way I'd take a position with you, and I might even just terminate the interview abruptly. With 20 years experience I consider myself to be interviewing the company just as much as vice versa.
Feel free to have the last word but I won't be reading/responding.
There is no hidden agenda. Again if you are condescending or arrogant with someone asking a simple question trying to understand how you think and communicate then you are responsible for yourself and your actions. Good luck with that attitude.
BTW. It only took a few answers on my part in a popular platform like dev.to to understand that from your reactions and I'm a total stranger trying to share my opinion. I'm not even a real interviewer or hiring anyone. How good is that for you?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
By the same logic, why are you returning a built in Promise in example number 5 rather than your own implementation of a Promise?
Because we don't want to test how to implement a Promise but their usage.
That would not stop anyone from asking you how Promises could be implemented, but that would fall out of the scope of the warmup. It would be a more challenging test for a more advanced scenario.
See for example:
promisejs.org/implementing/
Again, "moving the goalposts" -- "we don't want to test how to implement a Promise but their usage". Just substitute "Array.prototype.reverse" or "Array.prototype.reduce" and then re-consider your prior arguments and whether what you had suggested "would fall out of the scope" of the warmup.
So far I think you've been very unreasonable/illogical. These are not good traits in a developer/developer-interviewer and I now know beyond a doubt there is no way I'd take a position with you, and I might even just terminate the interview abruptly. With 20 years experience I consider myself to be interviewing the company just as much as vice versa.
Feel free to have the last word but I won't be reading/responding.
So you've decided not to move the goalposts on this one?
There is no hidden agenda. Again if you are condescending or arrogant with someone asking a simple question trying to understand how you think and communicate then you are responsible for yourself and your actions. Good luck with that attitude.
BTW. It only took a few answers on my part in a popular platform like dev.to to understand that from your reactions and I'm a total stranger trying to share my opinion. I'm not even a real interviewer or hiring anyone. How good is that for you?