4 ms·
I'm not sure I agree with you on this. Live programming interviews should not be the sole quality of judging someone, but if we've first given them a coding ex
by nowarninglabel 11y ago
I'm not sure I agree with you on this.
Live programming interviews should not be the sole quality of judging someone, but if we've first given them a coding exercise to do on their own time and they passed that, then it's useful to have them come in and do some coding to show that they can walk through their code and add additions/fix bugs to it without problem.
Which on that same note, I'm not sure why you would say they can only test "algorithmic" when we can do like I just described and have them for instance code a new feature in an existing code project of theirs.
That said, I agree with everyone else that they shouldn't be rushed, should allow the interviewee any and all resources they care to look up, and should shoot for "real-world" exercises over made-up scenarios.
- sergiosgc 11y agoI was speaking about live programming, during the interview. I much prefer asking candidates to write a task on their own time, and then use that code as basis for conversation during the interview. You get all the insights on how good a programmer he is, without the sweaty palms effect.