2 ms·
The test lost its validity over time, but how many people care about their craft enough to know how to write software without using a library, and be willing to
by bordercases 8y ago
The test lost its validity over time, but how many people care about their craft enough to know how to write software without using a library, and be willing to reason about it from first principles? Or with systematic method? They would be capable of doing original work. The rest I'd give CRUD tasks to.
- stcredzero 8y agoDo substantive enough work, give it enough time, and first principles will still bite the butt of the CRUD app maintainer.
- jf- 8y agoAn algorithms question proves today what it proved 15 years ago: that the candidate learned the algorithm. It does not and never did prove that the candidate spontaneously generated the solution in the interview. In other words, it isn’t an intelligence test. It isn’t even a programming aptitude test, but it is a conscientiousness test because the candidate went to the trouble of learning many algorithms successfully. That does count for something, but not necessarily what the interviewers expect. If you want to test for programming aptitude, give the candidate a realistic but difficult real world problem and let them solve it in an IDE.