3 ms·
I agree the standards are bad, for senior devs in particular. In addition to your points: Technical understanding of systems in general (networking, CAP, tes
by lubesGordi 7y ago
I agree the standards are bad, for senior devs in particular.
In addition to your points:
Technical understanding of systems in general (networking, CAP, testing, writing maintainable code) are all overlooked in the interview process, though these are what actually make a developer productive.
The older you get the more specialized and optimized you are to learning what matters, which is why most of the older guys suck at these types of interviews.
Imagine interviewing Brendan Gregg by giving him some leetcode problems!
- jjav 7y agoThat's a very good summary. Discerning what truly matters is really the mark of experience. And you're right, algorithm memorization doesn't fit in the top-50 of what matters for a software engineer. I went to CMU, enjoyed algorithms classes a lot. In the nearly 30-year career since, I've used that knowledge... never. Not once. It's not about the interview bar being too high. It should be high, mine is. But interviews based on algorithm memorization have the bar in the wrong place, measuring something that has no real-world relevance.