3 ms·
> or it's an indicator that they get flustered coding in front of people. I definitely underperform when pair coding, coding on a whiteboard instead of a comput
by bhouston 10y ago
> or it's an indicator that they get flustered coding in front of people. I definitely underperform when pair coding, coding on a whiteboard instead of a computer I'm familiar with? Probably not my best work.
One needs to evaluate people. I would prefer to evaluate people using a metric close to what is required in the job -- coding.
If people have issues that they can not be evaluated properly, then what I am supposed to do? Just hire anyone no matter how they do?
Of course coding isn't the only metric but it is one of a couple. If you write an algorithm that has indexing errors or no stopping condition or just does't work, it isn't a good thing. I do rely on coding on whiteboards or paper a lot more when it is someone new in their career and do not have many past accomplishments to point to.
- Wazzymandias 10y agoWhiteboard coding isn't really a metric close to what is required in the job though. I like to write my algorithms on paper first before writing code, but doing it on a whiteboard in 45 minutes while explaining my work and checking for edge cases can be a bit unreasonable. I don't think the contention is about testing a programmer's ability, but the way their ability is tested. Personally I think pair programming is a better method of testing someone's ability to code AND their ability to collaborate with others.