It would be a red flag if you were interviewing for react and decided to bring up vue or svelte or angular or whatever else as well.
It’s not like it’s only this C++/Rust type deal that is being picked on. Although I would suggest that rust fans tend to be particularly ardent and loud at the current moment, so interviewers may be far more turned off of you as a person just for bringing it up. Interviewers probably felt this way about people bringing up Python 20 years ago (Python devs of yore were WAY WAY worse about their “HAVE YOU HEARD THE WORD?!” Than rust devs are today), blockchain 7 years ago, etc.
Anyway. As an interviewee, I’d probably try to avoid being the one to bring up alternative technologies.
>It would be a red flag if you were interviewing for react and decided to bring up vue or svelte or angular or whatever else as well.
...why?
Seriously, why on earth? I don't follow this train of thought at all; if they demonstrate proficiency within the scope of the position, why does it matter if they also happen to know other technologies?
"Oh, Alice? Yeah, she was a great candidate, unfortunately she also had experience in Vue, so there's nothing we could do. We decided to hire Bob, who has 3 years less experience with React, but fortunately that's the only stack he's ever heard of."
If anything, it's a sign the person is interested in learning, most great devs I've met were not proficient only with a single technology. This sounds completely alien to me.
Nobody is saying to not expand your knowledge. You’re assuming it of this because it’s literally your only argument, but it’s an unfortunately shitty one, as most logical fallacies tend to be.
Nobody said “don’t have wide experience” but you. What I did say was “I’d probably avoid being an ardent fanboy toward an irrelevant to the interview tech stack”. And that “it’s most often best to leave irrelevant digressions to the interviewer”
Again, you go ahead and give out all the shit tier interview advice you like. For people that actually want jobs, probably try to stick to what’s relevant.
You said if someone brought up something like Svelte when interviewing for a React job it would be a red flag. That just sounds silly to people that know how naturally someone could connect Svelte to a discussion about React.
Could I imagine a scenario where it's a non-sequitur? Sure. Not really "don't hire this person" worthy, though.
I'm sorry but I'm having a hard time understanding why a person bringing up a tool in conversation during an interview is seen as such a clear and strong signal containing so much information about their professional performance.
But nowadays it seems like one has to 'turn on' an interviewer and avoid a minefield of forbidden words to get a job. If a workplace is to become a toxic cult-like environment being policed against such thoughtcrimes as being curious and interested in technology for its own sake I think one would be fortunate to be passed on after an interview to enter such a place.
It would be a red flag if you were interviewing for react and decided to bring up vue or svelte or angular or whatever else as well.
It’s not like it’s only this C++/Rust type deal that is being picked on. Although I would suggest that rust fans tend to be particularly ardent and loud at the current moment, so interviewers may be far more turned off of you as a person just for bringing it up. Interviewers probably felt this way about people bringing up Python 20 years ago (Python devs of yore were WAY WAY worse about their “HAVE YOU HEARD THE WORD?!” Than rust devs are today), blockchain 7 years ago, etc.
Anyway. As an interviewee, I’d probably try to avoid being the one to bring up alternative technologies.