Depending on where she's interviewing, that dress code may not match what they're after.
That said, my last several jobs I landed, I went in blue jeans and conference swag (startup tshirts).
Depending on where she's interviewing, that dress code may not match what they're after.
That said, my last several jobs I landed, I went in blue jeans and conference swag (startup tshirts).
That's the implicit dress code. It's just hard to notice because it's converged on standard male developer attire.
Conversely, a female interviewee is caught in the paradox of (a) appearing "too informal" by social standards for feminine attire if she dresses the way described above, or (b) appearing "too formal" if she does conform to social expectations for her gender. Never mind that women have an inordinately hard time finding non-unisex conference swag in their sizes in the first place.
Look smart, feel smart, and a clear separation for me between dressing for work (and thus being in professional work mode - this would be advantageous to my employer), and dressing for not work. As it is, at my current place, I can dress like this, which is nice.
However, the majority of tech places seem to have strict dress codes (brilliantly, hidden behind protestations that there's totally no dress code, no no no, although last week we [1] didn't hire someone because he wore a suit to the interview, but that's not for violating the dress code at a job he didn't even work at, no no no), and someone dressing smartly rather than the uniform of jeans/chinos and t-shirt, would cause uncertainty and unsettlement amongst the workers, many of whom would not be able to effectively work with someone who is not just like them.
[1] General case "we". If I ever hear someone come out of interviewing a candidate and suggest that dressing smartly was a negative, I go absolutely. Nuts. Hasn't happened for a very long time.