Where's the fun in the simple straightforward implementation ? How would you judge a candidate that, on the spot, decided to go with a new way to solve it just so (s)he could see if it worked out well. For example ... something like this ?
print '\n'.join(("fizz" if x % 3 == 0 else "") + ("buzz" if x % 5 == 0 else "") or str(x) for x in range(1, 100))
or even:
from __future__ import print_function
map(print, (("fizz" if x % 3 == 0 else "") + ("buzz" if x % 5 == 0 else "") or str(x) for x in range(1, 100)))
What if they come up with a solution, you have no idea why it works, but it works ?
Sadly, I expect most interviewers would react very negatively. I've already learned never to demonstrate actual programming ability, even when asked. Instead, answer every question the way you would answer physics problems in high school. You know, the problems asked by the teacher who has a bachelor in biology.
People are even justifying this with "clean code" arguments and the like. "Why aren't you using the framework ?". "Is that the best way to write such a complex thing". Worst of all : "what does that mean ?". You don't want to be asked those questions, it will not end well.
Interviewers who can't program will then start arguments about how programs should be designed/written, and the answer boils down to "design by committee, manned 90% by people who cannot pass FizzBuzz". Of course, best to leave out the second part if you point this out and instead add "ask for feedback".
And they wonder why development projects fail.
