I used to (still kind of) hate Leetcode-style interviews. But now I see it as a lesser evil, like Churchill's description of democracy. A while ago I posted a

I used to (still kind of) hate Leetcode-style interviews. But now I see it as a lesser evil, like Churchill's description of democracy. A while ago I posted a Ask HN question about the usage of Pseudo-IQ test which is very common in Swedish interview process. Pseudo-IQ test in the sense that it is almost always just Raven Matrix test + maybe math or personality test. I tend to score pretty well on those tests and it takes maybe 1h tops, but it's annoying and stressful either way, especially knowing what ideological foundation it comes from.... Seems like the answer from the Ask HN point towards that those tests used to be common in US/SV/Software position interviews too, but it then got kinda replaced by Leetcode-style interview. And sure, having a person staring at you commanding you to only use your brain to solve a toy problem is definitely not how you work. But it in combination of a bit of back-n-fort traditional interviewing is definitely more informative to the employee (and fair) than some pseudo-IQ test. I just hate when Leetcode is used as *the first screening* it's such an asshole move that show high level of disrespect towards the applicants time. Maybe you can get away with as FAANG, but small companies that do this to me just signal extreme arrogant (or delusional/dysfunctional) HR or C-suite. The best coding interview I've had is just the format "You've received a PR from a junior dev. The code compiles without error and pass the unit test. Would you pass/reject this PR and motivate why" and it often requires a better understanding of the language (such as difference between modern C++ and C++12)