5 ms·

you just confirmed you don’t need any actual skill and just learn the solutions by heart to get hired

by b20000 3y ago

Stephen_0xFF 3y ago
I’d agree with you if someone somehow managed to memorize all the problems line by line, but that isn’t the case. You’ve memorized how to build an array in your language of choice. You’ve memorized the patterns that require an array. You might’ve also picked up some techniques for splicing it. When I see a master working, be it in woodworking, art, or engineering, everything is second nature. Years of seeing what worked and what doesn’t and they make it look effortlessly — almost like they memorized it all. By all means, if the problem can be easily solved by DFS, but you want to be creative, try something else. If it was really creative, the interviewers will be sure to talk you up and you’ll beat out the “code monkey” that used DFS. If you invented some new type of search, I’ll look out for your paper on it. If you found a new way to hire and cut candidates only leaving the creative geniuses, I’m all ears.
hnfong 3y ago
If learning how to solve problems by reading a book is "memorizing solutions by heart" then yes, that's how most people do things. Look, as much as you might want to believe you (and everyone else in the industry) are geniuses, the fact is that we memorize a lot of stuff that were painstakingly invented or discovered by great minds in the past. If that is "don't need any actual skill" according to your dictionary, then so be it.
- b20000 3y ago
  engineering is about creativity and practice and not about memorizing standard solutions. leetcode does not test the skills that matter.
  - isbvhodnvemrwvn 3y ago
    Generously assuming software engineering is engineering - so you think that mechanical engineers or civil engineers don't reuse solutions 99.99% of the time?
  - pillefitz 3y ago
    Pattern recognition is pretty much at the core of creative work in an engineering context, of which memorizing existing patterns is the first half.
    - b20000 3y ago
      if you just need to apply standard patterns than you are not actually inventing but just doing code monkey stuff, and you can’t really call that engineering
      - dgunay 3y ago
        I wouldn't call constantly inventing new technology the only thing that qualifies as "engineering". It's about solving the problem under the given constraints. Sometimes that means evaluating existing solutions and determining that the problem is not novel and can be solved either in whole or in part with off the shelf software or textbook algorithms. The fact that this is the majority of business problems these days doesn't mean that no engineering is happening. IMO what actually is "not engineering" are the emotional, gut driven processes behind the software at some companies. No due diligence is done, requirements are scant, novelty frameworks are used, testing is a joke, etc. Anything resembling engineering is usually an accident in such places. I'm not saying process light environments are "not doing it right", I mean places that do nearly everything in an arbitrary, cargo-culted fashion.
      - rcarr 3y ago
        You literally sound like the kind of person who wants to reinvent the wheel.
      - pillefitz 3y ago
        Every professional discipline is typically preceded by years of study. Want to become a jazz musician? Great, first study recital of classical music for a couple years, then learn all there is to learn about scales, functional harmony, ... You learn the basic patterns, then you refine and combine those over years. For an outsider, this then looks like magic / creativity.
      - 3y ago
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    Leetcode is not for engineering on the job though, it's purely a test for getting hired. You wouldn't expect lawyers to take an LSAT while on the job. A lot of people, especially those who don't do Leetcode or work in a company that asks such questions, think Leetcode should somehow relate to the work and are annoyed, but it's just a test like any other.
    - ljm 3y ago
      To reword it, leetcode is a barrier to entry for newcomers. It's pure gatekeeping and it says as much when people think they have to 'grind' it to have any prospect of a job. It teaches you absolutely nothing about the rest of the job, around comms and leadership, which most of the time are more important than your ability to solve puzzles. It selects for people who want to get in and want to grind.
      - satvikpendem 3y ago
        On the contrary, Leetcode is one of the most egalitarian ways there is for hiring applicants, because if you can pass the test, you're basically hired, at least at FAANG and adjacent. I'd hate to have employers show implicit bias through such saccharine distinctions as "personal fit."
        dev_0 3y ago
        Who will be hired if three candidates can pass the leetcode test?
        ljm 3y ago
        I think you and the other person who replied to me were dismissing the value of soft skills and the other things you need to know as a software engineer that are adjacent to writing code. To put it another way - do you have an opportunity in leetcode to say the value of solving a challenge isn’t worth the time invested?
        satvikpendem 3y ago
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
losteric 3y ago
That's a disingenuous take. It's extremely unlikely you'll get asked any of these specific questions, but very likely you'll be asked something in the general space. Core knowledge extrapolates... to learn system design, one studies the design of "solved" systems, thus learning to solve for new design problems. If a company is asking leetcode questions verbatim, they probably don't care so much about that part of the interview anyway
- b20000 3y ago
  i have been a software engineer for 20 years and never had to implement any of this stuff myself in my career. the last time i did was in my master’s program in CS. in contrast i’ve had to implement custom memory allocators and many other non trivial algorithms which cannot be implemented in 10 minutes but take days to design and implement.

you just confirmed you don’t need any actual skill and just learn the solutions by heart to get hired

by b20000 3y ago

you just confirmed you don’t need any actual skill and just learn the solutions by heart to get hired

I’d agree with you if someone somehow managed to memorize all the problems line by line, but that isn’t the case. You’ve memorized how to build an array in your language of choice. You’ve memorized the patterns that require an array. You might’ve also picked up some techniques for splicing it. When I see a master working, be it in woodworking, art, or engineering, everything is second nature. Years of seeing what worked and what doesn’t and they make it look effortlessly — almost like they memorized it all. By all means, if the problem can be easily solved by DFS, but you want to be creative, try something else. If it was really creative, the interviewers will be sure to talk you up and you’ll beat out the “code monkey” that used DFS. If you invented some new type of search, I’ll look out for your paper on it. If you found a new way to hire and cut candidates only leaving the creative geniuses, I’m all ears.

hnfong 3y ago

If learning how to solve problems by reading a book is "memorizing solutions by heart" then yes, that's how most people do things. Look, as much as you might want to believe you (and everyone else in the industry) are geniuses, the fact is that we memorize a lot of stuff that were painstakingly invented or discovered by great minds in the past. If that is "don't need any actual skill" according to your dictionary, then so be it.

b20000 3y ago
engineering is about creativity and practice and not about memorizing standard solutions. leetcode does not test the skills that matter.
- isbvhodnvemrwvn 3y ago
  Generously assuming software engineering is engineering - so you think that mechanical engineers or civil engineers don't reuse solutions 99.99% of the time?
- pillefitz 3y ago
  Pattern recognition is pretty much at the core of creative work in an engineering context, of which memorizing existing patterns is the first half.
  - b20000 3y ago
    if you just need to apply standard patterns than you are not actually inventing but just doing code monkey stuff, and you can’t really call that engineering
    - dgunay 3y ago
      I wouldn't call constantly inventing new technology the only thing that qualifies as "engineering". It's about solving the problem under the given constraints. Sometimes that means evaluating existing solutions and determining that the problem is not novel and can be solved either in whole or in part with off the shelf software or textbook algorithms. The fact that this is the majority of business problems these days doesn't mean that no engineering is happening. IMO what actually is "not engineering" are the emotional, gut driven processes behind the software at some companies. No due diligence is done, requirements are scant, novelty frameworks are used, testing is a joke, etc. Anything resembling engineering is usually an accident in such places. I'm not saying process light environments are "not doing it right", I mean places that do nearly everything in an arbitrary, cargo-culted fashion.
    - rcarr 3y ago
      You literally sound like the kind of person who wants to reinvent the wheel.
    - pillefitz 3y ago
      Every professional discipline is typically preceded by years of study. Want to become a jazz musician? Great, first study recital of classical music for a couple years, then learn all there is to learn about scales, functional harmony, ... You learn the basic patterns, then you refine and combine those over years. For an outsider, this then looks like magic / creativity.
    - 3y ago
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  Leetcode is not for engineering on the job though, it's purely a test for getting hired. You wouldn't expect lawyers to take an LSAT while on the job. A lot of people, especially those who don't do Leetcode or work in a company that asks such questions, think Leetcode should somehow relate to the work and are annoyed, but it's just a test like any other.
  - ljm 3y ago
    To reword it, leetcode is a barrier to entry for newcomers. It's pure gatekeeping and it says as much when people think they have to 'grind' it to have any prospect of a job. It teaches you absolutely nothing about the rest of the job, around comms and leadership, which most of the time are more important than your ability to solve puzzles. It selects for people who want to get in and want to grind.
    - satvikpendem 3y ago
      On the contrary, Leetcode is one of the most egalitarian ways there is for hiring applicants, because if you can pass the test, you're basically hired, at least at FAANG and adjacent. I'd hate to have employers show implicit bias through such saccharine distinctions as "personal fit."
      - dev_0 3y ago
        Who will be hired if three candidates can pass the leetcode test?
      - ljm 3y ago
        I think you and the other person who replied to me were dismissing the value of soft skills and the other things you need to know as a software engineer that are adjacent to writing code. To put it another way - do you have an opportunity in leetcode to say the value of solving a challenge isn’t worth the time invested?
        satvikpendem 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

losteric 3y ago

That's a disingenuous take. It's extremely unlikely you'll get asked any of these specific questions, but very likely you'll be asked something in the general space. Core knowledge extrapolates... to learn system design, one studies the design of "solved" systems, thus learning to solve for new design problems. If a company is asking leetcode questions verbatim, they probably don't care so much about that part of the interview anyway

b20000 3y ago
i have been a software engineer for 20 years and never had to implement any of this stuff myself in my career. the last time i did was in my master’s program in CS. in contrast i’ve had to implement custom memory allocators and many other non trivial algorithms which cannot be implemented in 10 minutes but take days to design and implement.