3 ms·
What the article says makes sense but he's not disproving doing a coding test similar to what you may encounter on the job vs algorithms you'll implement once i
by jokethrowaway 5y ago
What the article says makes sense but he's not disproving doing a coding test similar to what you may encounter on the job vs algorithms you'll implement once in a lifetime.
When I'm interviewing, I ask about their projects to see if they're passionate about something and then I test them on something I need to implement for work (or similar enough).
It's often something like, implement an API endpoint that does X with Y database, implement this UI component. I'm happy to be flexible on language and technologies the candidate is familiar with.
If you think the job will be much more than that, you're simply wrong.
The closest I got to implement a leetcode exercise at work was when I had to implement pathfinding for a 3d game in a language that is not commonly used for games.
Turns out my naive solution was poor, I duckduckgoed 5 minutes and implemented a way better algorithm from Wikipedia.
Besides:
If I need to prepare for two months for your interview, I won't apply for your company.
Even doing a take home exercise takes way less time than that, I can crank most of those in a couple of hours. Still, I'd prefer a real world exercise at the interview, so I don't need to prepare anything in advance.
- martinbooth 5y agoThe questions are designed to allow an interviewer to get as much signal in the 45 minutes spent in the interview.. that's why they're contrived rather than your typical piece of work. They're not designed to test you on something you would never encounter though. If a company is asking these kinds of questions and the job only ever requires dealing with npm packages that shields the engineer from this complexity then they shouldn't be doing that in my opinion. But most of the companies asking these questions are in the business of building software that requires this lower-level knowledge