3 ms·

The main difference is the audience of both is different. Leetcode works like this. Company A is asking these 100 questions with this frequency; let me solve t

The main difference is the audience of both is different. Leetcode works like this. Company A is asking these 100 questions with this frequency; let me solve these questions so that when I encounter these in the interview I can solve them then. The whole premise of Leetcode is on giving a question bank to what is already being asked. The aim is to clear the base bar a company has set.

noisenotsignal 4y ago
It makes sense why someone who is good at LC via pattern recognition might not be as good at competitive programming. However, it’s not clear why the reverse would be true. Surely someone good at solving unencountered algorithmic problems would be good at LC?
- favre49 4y ago
  You're right, it's true - if you're good at competitive coding you'll be good at LC. But that's incidental. You don't even need to be a Div 1 competitor on (say) Codeforces to be great at LC - the bar is incredibly low. Just being average is more than good enough at interviews. Serious competitive programmers aim to solve problems much harder than Leetcode. Just look at some older ICPC and Codejam problems. There are some people who basically just do competitive programming to be good for interviews, but they don't get very far - not even to div 1. They reach whatever bar is necessary to clear an interview and quit immediately. The people who seriously compete to go for ICPC World Finals or to get far in CodeJam, they aren't really concerned with interviews.
- rfoo 4y ago
  That's right. I'm an okay-ish competitive programmer (around 2400 on Codeforces). I haven't played competitive programming for years (though being semi-active in the community, for problem setting etc) and last I tried I can still randomly draw a LeetCode hard, consistently solve in 10-15 minutes max. The problem is LeetCode is SO BORING for anyone ever tried competitive programming so people usually won't do it at all.
  - junofan 4y ago
    It’s super weird seeing people who maybe aren’t into puzzles use pattern matching strategies they developed by practicing leetcode.

noisenotsignal 4y ago

It makes sense why someone who is good at LC via pattern recognition might not be as good at competitive programming. However, it’s not clear why the reverse would be true. Surely someone good at solving unencountered algorithmic problems would be good at LC?

favre49 4y ago
You're right, it's true - if you're good at competitive coding you'll be good at LC. But that's incidental. You don't even need to be a Div 1 competitor on (say) Codeforces to be great at LC - the bar is incredibly low. Just being average is more than good enough at interviews. Serious competitive programmers aim to solve problems much harder than Leetcode. Just look at some older ICPC and Codejam problems. There are some people who basically just do competitive programming to be good for interviews, but they don't get very far - not even to div 1. They reach whatever bar is necessary to clear an interview and quit immediately. The people who seriously compete to go for ICPC World Finals or to get far in CodeJam, they aren't really concerned with interviews.
rfoo 4y ago
That's right. I'm an okay-ish competitive programmer (around 2400 on Codeforces). I haven't played competitive programming for years (though being semi-active in the community, for problem setting etc) and last I tried I can still randomly draw a LeetCode hard, consistently solve in 10-15 minutes max. The problem is LeetCode is SO BORING for anyone ever tried competitive programming so people usually won't do it at all.
- junofan 4y ago
  It’s super weird seeing people who maybe aren’t into puzzles use pattern matching strategies they developed by practicing leetcode.