29 ms·

I never understood the hate Leetcode gets. Whenever you change jobs, chances are you'll encounter some new technology you do not yet know. You'll have to prepar

I never understood the hate Leetcode gets. Whenever you change jobs, chances are you'll encounter some new technology you do not yet know. You'll have to prepare for it. Algorithmic problem solving is like riding a bike, you only have to learn it once. While it's possible that no one will write Kotlin in a decade, it's very unlikely that knowing how to do a topological sort will go out of fashion. The counter arguments often mentioned against Leetcode I often hear: - You are often asked stuff that took PhDs years to figure out: This usually shows up only in Hard questions, and badly designed ones at that. In my experience, Medium ones are usually solvable with solid algorithmic knowledge. It is also usually that maximum difficulty people encounter during their work. - It discriminates against women/minorities: I don't live in a very diverse country, so I don't know anything about the minorities part, but in my career, I've encountered plenty of women who were as good or better than men in solving algorithmic issues. It does filter people, because it's designed to filter people, but I've never found it discriminatory along gender lines. - It discriminates against poor people: You're a programmer, you are not poor. Even if you were, the few weeks of time investment it requires is usually offset by the higher salary you can ask for. Think of it as an investment in your future. Or if you are not a programmer, the amount of skills you need to learn to get your first programming job is usually far excess of just learning leetcode.

Aeolun 5y ago
> it's very unlikely that knowing how to do a topological sort will go out of fashion It is also vanishingly unlikely I’ll ever have to do a topological sort. 15 years and counting. Meanwhile, being able to read and understand a bit of kotlin has proven useful several times.
- layer8 5y ago
  Topological sort implicitly comes up anytime you implement a depth-first search on a graph that isn’t 100% guaranteed to be cycle-free. Checking for cycles in a depth-first search is basically the same as topological sort. Having to implement something like that comes up roughly every 3 years for me.
  - aeroevan 5y ago
    But how often are you actually writing an implementation vs. calling a method from a graph library? Knowing when you need a topological ordered list of vertices is (in my opinion) more useful than knowing how to implement tsort.
    - layer8 5y ago
      > how often are you actually writing an implementation vs. calling a method from a graph library? Every time. Because of several reasons: 1. Transforming the graph (which is usually not explicitly represented, but rather the result of navigating entities using some existing API) to the representation required by the graph library is more complex than just implementing the search and the cycle check yourself (it's usually just insertion into a set and checking if the element was already contained). 2. Often there are additional actions you want to take during the traversal, and diagnostics you want to output, which is either impossible or difficult/convoluted to integrate with a graph library. 3. Dependencies incur maintenance cost and should not be added lightly. Adding a graph library just for a simple topological sort is usually not a good trade-off. Knowing how topological sort is implemented is necessary to make the right design decision here. Otherwise you end up adding a big dependency and convoluted glue code just because you didn't realize how straightforward and maintenance-friendly a custom implementation tailored to the present use-case could be. Or, in other cases, you may end up implementing a custom algorithm without realizing that it actually corresponds closely to an existing graph algorithm (which would help you double-check your implementation or replace it with an existing library).
phphphphp 5y ago
I enjoy programming challenges and do them for fun and I see their value as an exercise in thinking, but the problems I solve with them aren’t a reflection of the real world work I do or have done. I’ve never needed a topological sort in my day jobs. If a company asks me to complete a leetcode style code challenge they are not getting a representation of the work I’ll do day to day, so I always make a point in an interview to say, “I may have passed your test but please don’t judge me on that basis, let’s discuss my work”. They’re garbage as a hiring tool for lots of reasons, but mostly it comes down to the reality that they just aren’t representative by any stretch of the imagination.
dathinab 5y ago
> topological sort will go out of fashion. If you as a normal software engine write a topological sort algorithm you likely failed your job. Your job is to use existing topological sort algorithms designed by people specialized in that area, implemented by people which are specialized in implementing and fine tuning algorithms (it's its whole own field of expertise, and overlooked field tbh.). Or to reformulate it the job of an software engineer is to reuse existing components and basic building blocks to create larger components or programs, but it's not your job to create new basic building blocks. The job requires you to have an understanding of such components but not to memorize them. Sure sometimes you have to create basic building blocks, but then doing so from memory is nearly always the wrong approach. Leet code is not at all representative for "how well someone is suited for given job" (for most companies/offers, there always are exceptions). While wasting everyone's time. And favoring certain skill sets/problem solving approaches (memorization) over others (adaptability, deep generic understanding), at least in the way they tend to be implemented. It also strongly discriminates again anyone with exam anxiety and similar. Be aware that the points mentioned here apply to common leet code based screening (especially automatized screening), but not necessary asking people to solve some code problem in interviews (if you handle that appropriately).
- wittycardio 5y ago
  If you're a software engineer and you don't know what topological sort is then you don't know how any sort of dependency structure works and that's a big part of your day to day. Implementing topological sort is a few lines of code and anyone should be able to do it
- dpryden 5y ago
  This hints at an (IMO underrated) skill: being able to look at a problem and decomposing it into sub-problems that are solved by known algorithms. Topological sort is a pretty fundamental building block for solving many problems that involve dependencies between components, since those can be modeled as a directed graph. Knowing how to write a topological sort isn't the key skill here (although, I would argue, it's a good skill to know, and it's probably much simpler than you're imagining). The key skill is knowing that a topological sort will solve the problem, or perhaps it's simply knowing that "finding an order of actions that satisfies these dependency constraints" is called a topological sort. I have always been under the impression that the goal of leetcode-style interviewing was actually to measure a candidate's ability to recognize what algorithmic tool to use, rather than to measure a candidate's ability to implement an algorithm from scratch. When I've been in the position of interviewing in the past, I've always been more interested in that problem-solving approach than in the actual code. In my experience, most software jobs are 90% figuring out the problem that needs to be solved and coming up with tactics for solving the problem, and 10% actually implementing those tactics. In that context, investigating the ability of a candidate to analyze problems seems like an excellent interview technique.
uberman 5y ago
Knowing why one would use a "topological sort" is (might be?) important. There is almost nothing important about knowing how to do one. This is the failure of leetcode. I would take 1 person who can understand problems at a high level and Google the minutia over 10 that try to remember how to re-balance a tree and confidently introduce off by one bugs.
- bhelkey 5y ago
  > I would take 1 person who can understand problems at a high level and Google the minutia over 10 that try to remember how to re-balance a tree and confidently introduce off by one bugs. How do you plan on screening for that person?
cowl 5y ago
If you have not worked on any topological sorting for the past 15 years you will not remember how to do it under the pressure of time. in a new language etc. you will need some time to remember the correct algorithm, how to adapt the data structures to the current language you are working on etc. And unless the problem is specified exactly as such, the most difficult thing is to come up with the idea that a given problem can be formulated as a topological sort problem, that is 80% of the solution. I am sure that most Experienced engineers when given this problem as a home task will come up with a correct solution even if they fail the time pressured leetcode.
YEwSdObPQT 5y ago
I've been programming computers since I was 10. I am almost 40. I've been working professionally for about 15 years now. I've never done leetcode. But I have done stuff like (hackerrank) and I have to spend an evening proving I know how to write some arbitrary problem that I will never encounter anything close to in the position I am applying for. I can solve them. But I feel like I am wasting my time when I do it for the 10th time. I now refuse to do all coding tests. I have a github and a company page with my work and if that isn't sufficient, then so be it. As for the counter arguments: > You are often asked stuff that took PhDs years to figure out: This usually shows up only in Hard questions, and badly designed ones at that. In my experience, Medium ones are usually solvable with solid algorithmic knowledge. It is also usually that maximum difficulty people encounter during their work. Software engineer are not computer scientists. 95% of my time is normally gluing libraries together to build a product. Most of the time I am just implementing business processes in code and I don't really need to implement anything fancier than a for loop. What is normally more important is implementing the (correct) patterns, good practices and managing changing requirements, implementing a database schema that makes sense. The sort of problems in leetcode won't help you do any of this. All it proves is that you can solve some arbitrary and unrealistic problem. > It discriminates against poor people: You're a programmer, you are not poor. Even if you were, the few weeks of time investment it requires is usually offset by the higher salary you can ask for. Think of it as an investment in your future. Or if you are not a programmer, the amount of skills you need to learn to get your first programming job is usually far excess of just learning leetcode. Many of the people grinding things like l33tcode are looking to get a web development job so they don't have to work frying chicken in the local KFC knockoff. Building most websites doesn't need to learn a bunch of algorithms. What you do need to have is a solid understand of HTML, CSS, JavaScript and how things likes HTTP work. The sort of problems in leetcode are absolutely irrelevant to this sort of work. It ultimately depends on what sort of jobs you are applying for. A lot of positions won't require the skills that leetcode and similar try to test. > It discriminates against women/minorities: I don't live in a very diverse country, so I don't know anything about the minorities part, but in my career, I've encountered plenty of women who were as good or better than men in solving algorithmic issues. It does filter people, because it's designed to filter people, but I've never found it discriminatory along gender lines. No it discriminates against older developers and developers that are self taught. Typically when you are looking for the skills needed to work in a particular field you will look at job postings or talk to other engineers already in the field and they will typically say "You need to understand this language or something similar and how X and Y work" and typically people will buy a book, or do a course on those things. With older developers a lot of these wanky problems we forgotten how to solve years ago after we left university because the majority of jobs outside of FAANG will rarely require anything more complicated that recursion or a for loop. You are trying to assess whether people can do a job. Not solve arbitrary problems that don't present themselves in the vast majority of circumstances.
lentil_soup 5y ago
I love algorithmic challenges and would even compete while in uni and coincidentally last year I even had to do several topological sorts at my company. But I actively hate and avoid leetcode type interviews. For me it's the time pressure while someone is looking over your shoulder and them asking you to talk and explain your thinking. I just panic and close up, I need mental space to come up with an algorithmic solution and can't do that if you want me to "talk through my process". Leave me some time to solve the issue and I'll come back to you with a solution, just like it is in a real job.
danaris 5y ago
> You're a programmer, you are not poor. This is hugely Silicon-Valley-centric. There are millions of skilled programmers outside that culture, who have never had a six-figure salary, many who have never even worked for a tech company. Just regular (white-collar) working people with the same kinds of burdens that the average American (or European, or person from any other developed country on the planet) has to deal with. In short, this shows how much you live in a bubble and don't understand what life is like outside of it.
canyonero 5y ago
> It discriminates against poor people: You're a programmer, you are not poor. Even if you were, the few weeks of time investment it requires is usually offset by the higher salary you can ask for. Think of it as an investment in your future. Or if you are not a programmer, the amount of skills you need to learn to get your first programming job is usually far excess of just learning leetcode This comment does not acknowledge the experience experience of many people who grew up poor or put themselves into major debt because they didn’t receive financial support or live in economically disadvantaged areas. I grew up poor and took out massive education loans to pay for my education. I still pay off those debts today. Does that mean I consider myself poor now? No, but my economic disadvantage has made me need to work much harder in other areas and I’ve needed to prioritize many other things over leetcode. I haven’t had the luxury of spending multiple hours a week to get “good” at leetcode So yes, I’d argue that leetcode is responsible for gatekeeping people out of jobs who don’t have time/money to grind on it.
- cloverich 5y ago
  Leetcode prep is less time and money than getting a degree in anything. Anybody with sufficient interest can find the time to get to a basic competence level in leetcode and system design. Getting real life experience or a college degree has got to be the bigger gate.
  - canyonero 5y ago
    > Anybody with sufficient interest can find the time to get to a basic competence level in leetcode and system design. OK. But, it has nothing to do with interest. It's time (which may already occupied with working long hours or a second job to pay off debt or looking after family). Who has extra time to perform leetcode tasks that have no alignment to day-to-day tasks and expectations. People with the luxury of free-time, thus attracting a certain type of profile. > Getting real life experience or a college degree has got to be the bigger gate. You don't just get a job doing leetcode. The experience and/or degree are table-stakes. The OP post is asking folks who likely already have experience or a degree related to the field of software engineering.
beebmam 5y ago
If you don't understand the hate, listen to people more carefully. But I think you actually mean: "I understand why other people hate leetcide, and I think their emotions are invalid". At least own your argument
vmception 5y ago
> I don't live in a very diverse country, so I don't know anything about the minorities part I love how you lead with this and then drive a car into every single wall about this issue. Its like the most predictable meme and you are it. You've encountered women.... proportionally? What stage of the career, entry level, lead? The only point here is about time, and time commitment available. Forget about the supporting culture you were raised around for "grinding for the job you want", that method discriminates against competent people who have other obligations. When people are interviewing for a job, they are interviewing for many jobs at other potential places, so there is no way to determine passion or seriousness by their willingness to focus on studying for your job, it only determines who has things they can neglect. And basically that is just single men without debts or other distractions. Many times minorities have other distractions, in your non-diverse country a minority would likely have a time limit to find a job to maintain a visa or comply with an asylum application. Women often have other distractions as well, with only some slim slivers of time being similar to the single men. Hope that illuminates something for you, or others.
- my_usernam3 5y ago
  Yeah I don't buy your argument. I don't think leetcode questions are perfect, I also agree that women/minorities have extra distractions and hurdles which as a society we should look to lessen and improve. However, I find these distractions are much stronger correlated with a person's economic situation rather than race or gender. Also, I agree with the parent of your comment where the time spent with leetcode is a small fraction of the time needed to learn CS fundamentals, which are usually required for the job. Especially when you're not expected the candidate to KNOW the answer, you're observing HOW they solve the answer. I've failed candidates that memorized solutions, but could explain how they got there. And I championed ones that didn't get the optimal solution, but had a good thinking process that they could properly communicate to me. Guess which candidate spent more time studying?
  - vmception 5y ago
    > However, I find these distractions are much stronger correlated with a person's economic situation rather than race or gender. Which changes nothing when its a 99% correlation by race and gender. Its not a dissertation, its acknowledging that something has the result of marginalizes groups disproportionately. Disproportionately means that it doesn't affect everyone, it doesn't 'affect all women and all minorities. It means disproportionately affects, due to their disproportionate representation in these distracting economic circumstances, so lets do something else instead since the reasons why it affects them isn't going to change in our lifetime. > Also, I agree with the parent of your comment where the time spent with leetcode is a small fraction of the time needed to learn CS fundamentals If people got formal education they took the risk for that allotted time. It doesn't matter if a time-discriminatory process takes less time, its an additional and unnecessary risk for the candidate. If people didn't get formal education then they didn't take the risk for the allotted time, they just have exposure to the tasks the company needs. That alone suggests more inspiration is needed to have a different way of determining their compentency.
pacomerh 5y ago
> I never understood the hate Leetcode gets Getting leetcode questions at an interview is ridiculous if the position doesn't require it.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Aeolun 5y ago

> it's very unlikely that knowing how to do a topological sort will go out of fashion It is also vanishingly unlikely I’ll ever have to do a topological sort. 15 years and counting. Meanwhile, being able to read and understand a bit of kotlin has proven useful several times.

layer8 5y ago
Topological sort implicitly comes up anytime you implement a depth-first search on a graph that isn’t 100% guaranteed to be cycle-free. Checking for cycles in a depth-first search is basically the same as topological sort. Having to implement something like that comes up roughly every 3 years for me.
- aeroevan 5y ago
  But how often are you actually writing an implementation vs. calling a method from a graph library? Knowing when you need a topological ordered list of vertices is (in my opinion) more useful than knowing how to implement tsort.
  - layer8 5y ago
    > how often are you actually writing an implementation vs. calling a method from a graph library? Every time. Because of several reasons: 1. Transforming the graph (which is usually not explicitly represented, but rather the result of navigating entities using some existing API) to the representation required by the graph library is more complex than just implementing the search and the cycle check yourself (it's usually just insertion into a set and checking if the element was already contained). 2. Often there are additional actions you want to take during the traversal, and diagnostics you want to output, which is either impossible or difficult/convoluted to integrate with a graph library. 3. Dependencies incur maintenance cost and should not be added lightly. Adding a graph library just for a simple topological sort is usually not a good trade-off. Knowing how topological sort is implemented is necessary to make the right design decision here. Otherwise you end up adding a big dependency and convoluted glue code just because you didn't realize how straightforward and maintenance-friendly a custom implementation tailored to the present use-case could be. Or, in other cases, you may end up implementing a custom algorithm without realizing that it actually corresponds closely to an existing graph algorithm (which would help you double-check your implementation or replace it with an existing library).

phphphphp 5y ago

I enjoy programming challenges and do them for fun and I see their value as an exercise in thinking, but the problems I solve with them aren’t a reflection of the real world work I do or have done. I’ve never needed a topological sort in my day jobs. If a company asks me to complete a leetcode style code challenge they are not getting a representation of the work I’ll do day to day, so I always make a point in an interview to say, “I may have passed your test but please don’t judge me on that basis, let’s discuss my work”. They’re garbage as a hiring tool for lots of reasons, but mostly it comes down to the reality that they just aren’t representative by any stretch of the imagination.

dathinab 5y ago

> topological sort will go out of fashion. If you as a normal software engine write a topological sort algorithm you likely failed your job. Your job is to use existing topological sort algorithms designed by people specialized in that area, implemented by people which are specialized in implementing and fine tuning algorithms (it's its whole own field of expertise, and overlooked field tbh.). Or to reformulate it the job of an software engineer is to reuse existing components and basic building blocks to create larger components or programs, but it's not your job to create new basic building blocks. The job requires you to have an understanding of such components but not to memorize them. Sure sometimes you have to create basic building blocks, but then doing so from memory is nearly always the wrong approach. Leet code is not at all representative for "how well someone is suited for given job" (for most companies/offers, there always are exceptions). While wasting everyone's time. And favoring certain skill sets/problem solving approaches (memorization) over others (adaptability, deep generic understanding), at least in the way they tend to be implemented. It also strongly discriminates again anyone with exam anxiety and similar. Be aware that the points mentioned here apply to common leet code based screening (especially automatized screening), but not necessary asking people to solve some code problem in interviews (if you handle that appropriately).

wittycardio 5y ago
If you're a software engineer and you don't know what topological sort is then you don't know how any sort of dependency structure works and that's a big part of your day to day. Implementing topological sort is a few lines of code and anyone should be able to do it
dpryden 5y ago
This hints at an (IMO underrated) skill: being able to look at a problem and decomposing it into sub-problems that are solved by known algorithms. Topological sort is a pretty fundamental building block for solving many problems that involve dependencies between components, since those can be modeled as a directed graph. Knowing how to write a topological sort isn't the key skill here (although, I would argue, it's a good skill to know, and it's probably much simpler than you're imagining). The key skill is knowing that a topological sort will solve the problem, or perhaps it's simply knowing that "finding an order of actions that satisfies these dependency constraints" is called a topological sort. I have always been under the impression that the goal of leetcode-style interviewing was actually to measure a candidate's ability to recognize what algorithmic tool to use, rather than to measure a candidate's ability to implement an algorithm from scratch. When I've been in the position of interviewing in the past, I've always been more interested in that problem-solving approach than in the actual code. In my experience, most software jobs are 90% figuring out the problem that needs to be solved and coming up with tactics for solving the problem, and 10% actually implementing those tactics. In that context, investigating the ability of a candidate to analyze problems seems like an excellent interview technique.

uberman 5y ago

Knowing why one would use a "topological sort" is (might be?) important. There is almost nothing important about knowing how to do one. This is the failure of leetcode. I would take 1 person who can understand problems at a high level and Google the minutia over 10 that try to remember how to re-balance a tree and confidently introduce off by one bugs.

bhelkey 5y ago
> I would take 1 person who can understand problems at a high level and Google the minutia over 10 that try to remember how to re-balance a tree and confidently introduce off by one bugs. How do you plan on screening for that person?

cowl 5y ago

If you have not worked on any topological sorting for the past 15 years you will not remember how to do it under the pressure of time. in a new language etc. you will need some time to remember the correct algorithm, how to adapt the data structures to the current language you are working on etc. And unless the problem is specified exactly as such, the most difficult thing is to come up with the idea that a given problem can be formulated as a topological sort problem, that is 80% of the solution. I am sure that most Experienced engineers when given this problem as a home task will come up with a correct solution even if they fail the time pressured leetcode.

YEwSdObPQT 5y ago

I've been programming computers since I was 10. I am almost 40. I've been working professionally for about 15 years now. I've never done leetcode. But I have done stuff like (hackerrank) and I have to spend an evening proving I know how to write some arbitrary problem that I will never encounter anything close to in the position I am applying for. I can solve them. But I feel like I am wasting my time when I do it for the 10th time. I now refuse to do all coding tests. I have a github and a company page with my work and if that isn't sufficient, then so be it. As for the counter arguments: > You are often asked stuff that took PhDs years to figure out: This usually shows up only in Hard questions, and badly designed ones at that. In my experience, Medium ones are usually solvable with solid algorithmic knowledge. It is also usually that maximum difficulty people encounter during their work. Software engineer are not computer scientists. 95% of my time is normally gluing libraries together to build a product. Most of the time I am just implementing business processes in code and I don't really need to implement anything fancier than a for loop. What is normally more important is implementing the (correct) patterns, good practices and managing changing requirements, implementing a database schema that makes sense. The sort of problems in leetcode won't help you do any of this. All it proves is that you can solve some arbitrary and unrealistic problem. > It discriminates against poor people: You're a programmer, you are not poor. Even if you were, the few weeks of time investment it requires is usually offset by the higher salary you can ask for. Think of it as an investment in your future. Or if you are not a programmer, the amount of skills you need to learn to get your first programming job is usually far excess of just learning leetcode. Many of the people grinding things like l33tcode are looking to get a web development job so they don't have to work frying chicken in the local KFC knockoff. Building most websites doesn't need to learn a bunch of algorithms. What you do need to have is a solid understand of HTML, CSS, JavaScript and how things likes HTTP work. The sort of problems in leetcode are absolutely irrelevant to this sort of work. It ultimately depends on what sort of jobs you are applying for. A lot of positions won't require the skills that leetcode and similar try to test. > It discriminates against women/minorities: I don't live in a very diverse country, so I don't know anything about the minorities part, but in my career, I've encountered plenty of women who were as good or better than men in solving algorithmic issues. It does filter people, because it's designed to filter people, but I've never found it discriminatory along gender lines. No it discriminates against older developers and developers that are self taught. Typically when you are looking for the skills needed to work in a particular field you will look at job postings or talk to other engineers already in the field and they will typically say "You need to understand this language or something similar and how X and Y work" and typically people will buy a book, or do a course on those things. With older developers a lot of these wanky problems we forgotten how to solve years ago after we left university because the majority of jobs outside of FAANG will rarely require anything more complicated that recursion or a for loop. You are trying to assess whether people can do a job. Not solve arbitrary problems that don't present themselves in the vast majority of circumstances.

lentil_soup 5y ago

I love algorithmic challenges and would even compete while in uni and coincidentally last year I even had to do several topological sorts at my company. But I actively hate and avoid leetcode type interviews. For me it's the time pressure while someone is looking over your shoulder and them asking you to talk and explain your thinking. I just panic and close up, I need mental space to come up with an algorithmic solution and can't do that if you want me to "talk through my process". Leave me some time to solve the issue and I'll come back to you with a solution, just like it is in a real job.

danaris 5y ago

> You're a programmer, you are not poor. This is hugely Silicon-Valley-centric. There are millions of skilled programmers outside that culture, who have never had a six-figure salary, many who have never even worked for a tech company. Just regular (white-collar) working people with the same kinds of burdens that the average American (or European, or person from any other developed country on the planet) has to deal with. In short, this shows how much you live in a bubble and don't understand what life is like outside of it.

canyonero 5y ago

> It discriminates against poor people: You're a programmer, you are not poor. Even if you were, the few weeks of time investment it requires is usually offset by the higher salary you can ask for. Think of it as an investment in your future. Or if you are not a programmer, the amount of skills you need to learn to get your first programming job is usually far excess of just learning leetcode This comment does not acknowledge the experience experience of many people who grew up poor or put themselves into major debt because they didn’t receive financial support or live in economically disadvantaged areas. I grew up poor and took out massive education loans to pay for my education. I still pay off those debts today. Does that mean I consider myself poor now? No, but my economic disadvantage has made me need to work much harder in other areas and I’ve needed to prioritize many other things over leetcode. I haven’t had the luxury of spending multiple hours a week to get “good” at leetcode So yes, I’d argue that leetcode is responsible for gatekeeping people out of jobs who don’t have time/money to grind on it.

cloverich 5y ago
Leetcode prep is less time and money than getting a degree in anything. Anybody with sufficient interest can find the time to get to a basic competence level in leetcode and system design. Getting real life experience or a college degree has got to be the bigger gate.
- canyonero 5y ago
  > Anybody with sufficient interest can find the time to get to a basic competence level in leetcode and system design. OK. But, it has nothing to do with interest. It's time (which may already occupied with working long hours or a second job to pay off debt or looking after family). Who has extra time to perform leetcode tasks that have no alignment to day-to-day tasks and expectations. People with the luxury of free-time, thus attracting a certain type of profile. > Getting real life experience or a college degree has got to be the bigger gate. You don't just get a job doing leetcode. The experience and/or degree are table-stakes. The OP post is asking folks who likely already have experience or a degree related to the field of software engineering.

beebmam 5y ago

If you don't understand the hate, listen to people more carefully. But I think you actually mean: "I understand why other people hate leetcide, and I think their emotions are invalid". At least own your argument

vmception 5y ago

> I don't live in a very diverse country, so I don't know anything about the minorities part I love how you lead with this and then drive a car into every single wall about this issue. Its like the most predictable meme and you are it. You've encountered women.... proportionally? What stage of the career, entry level, lead? The only point here is about time, and time commitment available. Forget about the supporting culture you were raised around for "grinding for the job you want", that method discriminates against competent people who have other obligations. When people are interviewing for a job, they are interviewing for many jobs at other potential places, so there is no way to determine passion or seriousness by their willingness to focus on studying for your job, it only determines who has things they can neglect. And basically that is just single men without debts or other distractions. Many times minorities have other distractions, in your non-diverse country a minority would likely have a time limit to find a job to maintain a visa or comply with an asylum application. Women often have other distractions as well, with only some slim slivers of time being similar to the single men. Hope that illuminates something for you, or others.

my_usernam3 5y ago
Yeah I don't buy your argument. I don't think leetcode questions are perfect, I also agree that women/minorities have extra distractions and hurdles which as a society we should look to lessen and improve. However, I find these distractions are much stronger correlated with a person's economic situation rather than race or gender. Also, I agree with the parent of your comment where the time spent with leetcode is a small fraction of the time needed to learn CS fundamentals, which are usually required for the job. Especially when you're not expected the candidate to KNOW the answer, you're observing HOW they solve the answer. I've failed candidates that memorized solutions, but could explain how they got there. And I championed ones that didn't get the optimal solution, but had a good thinking process that they could properly communicate to me. Guess which candidate spent more time studying?
- vmception 5y ago
  > However, I find these distractions are much stronger correlated with a person's economic situation rather than race or gender. Which changes nothing when its a 99% correlation by race and gender. Its not a dissertation, its acknowledging that something has the result of marginalizes groups disproportionately. Disproportionately means that it doesn't affect everyone, it doesn't 'affect all women and all minorities. It means disproportionately affects, due to their disproportionate representation in these distracting economic circumstances, so lets do something else instead since the reasons why it affects them isn't going to change in our lifetime. > Also, I agree with the parent of your comment where the time spent with leetcode is a small fraction of the time needed to learn CS fundamentals If people got formal education they took the risk for that allotted time. It doesn't matter if a time-discriminatory process takes less time, its an additional and unnecessary risk for the candidate. If people didn't get formal education then they didn't take the risk for the allotted time, they just have exposure to the tasks the company needs. That alone suggests more inspiration is needed to have a different way of determining their compentency.

pacomerh 5y ago

> I never understood the hate Leetcode gets Getting leetcode questions at an interview is ridiculous if the position doesn't require it.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]