4 ms·

Whiteboard tests are already stupid, but some companies take it to another level. The last time I went to get interviewed by Amazon, they told me to write a com

Whiteboard tests are already stupid, but some companies take it to another level. The last time I went to get interviewed by Amazon, they told me to write a complete, syntactically correct, "ready to go into production" code (I was literally told this). I didn't get that job. They did even worse when my friend was interviewed by them. He was told to write production quality code on a whiteboard, and when he did that, they asked for an explanation, and clicked a photo of it through their smartphone to evaluate it later, probably on a real compiler. Really, when you can't even understand production quality code on a whiteboard by yourself, how do you expect people to write it in a tense setting?

aniket_ray 11y ago
The photo was probably clicked to attach it to some sort of internal candidate feedback form. Photos ensure that the interviewer does not make a typographical mistake while entering it in. Also production quality code is usually interview speak for "Your code should be more robust i.e. check inputs and return values from library functions. Fix it."
ericlippert 11y ago
I usually take a photo of the candidate's work, but not to evaluate whether it is correct or not; I already know that. I take the photo primarily because the board is about to be erased for the next candidate, and I want to make sure that my notes are accurate when I describe the candidate's strengths and weaknesses. Having a photo also allows me to compare the candidate's work against that of previous candidates, so that I can ensure that my interview process is well-calibrated. It is also a preventative measure, so that when a no-hire candidate sues the company claiming discrimination in hiring practices against whatever protected class they are in, I have more evidence than my notes and fallible memory. Fortunately I have never actually needed to use that.

aniket_ray 11y ago

The photo was probably clicked to attach it to some sort of internal candidate feedback form. Photos ensure that the interviewer does not make a typographical mistake while entering it in. Also production quality code is usually interview speak for "Your code should be more robust i.e. check inputs and return values from library functions. Fix it."

ericlippert 11y ago

I usually take a photo of the candidate's work, but not to evaluate whether it is correct or not; I already know that. I take the photo primarily because the board is about to be erased for the next candidate, and I want to make sure that my notes are accurate when I describe the candidate's strengths and weaknesses. Having a photo also allows me to compare the candidate's work against that of previous candidates, so that I can ensure that my interview process is well-calibrated. It is also a preventative measure, so that when a no-hire candidate sues the company claiming discrimination in hiring practices against whatever protected class they are in, I have more evidence than my notes and fallible memory. Fortunately I have never actually needed to use that.