Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

keyvalues.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 370 posts

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#181

Post by pmiller2 »

cakes wrote: post #156
pkteison wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time an interviewer has told me something like this, they then nitpick syntax and appear to be primarily concerned with "does my whiteboard code compile" sorts of problems. And getting stuck / asking for help feels like I get docked for getting stuck. Same with less optimized. So it's hard to trust such an explanation - clearly my interview would be better if I came up with the perfectly optimized solution, or…

This is generally the same experience I have had. I'll even talk through the assumptions (e.g. "Can we assume I know how to do argument checking?") and then after I've done the heavy-lifting of the problem-solving I'm now discussing how I didn't do something I brought up as an assumption. Also, generally, if I'm whiteboarding in front of my coworkers/team/etc. I'm discussing something I've thought about for more than…

Writing down the assumptions can help.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#182

Post by ggggtez »

nybblesio wrote: post #113

A regular viewer of my daily Twitch programming stream (link is in my profile) asked me to solve a problem he was asked to whiteboard. He wasn't asked to draw diagrams or write pseudo-code so they could learn how well he communicated. He was asked to write the code and it was heavily implied that it must compile and run -- even though whiteboards don't do that. Here's my attempt: https://youtu.be/6LHqrxrC6Uo I solved…

I think it's trivial to code an optimal solution (and discuss tradeoffs) in 45 minutes on a whiteboard. It's just BFS or DFS.

Of course most people prefer to interview in a language which is less verbose than C++, which saves time.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#183

Post by sidlls »

throwawaymath wrote: post #163
timr wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's bizarre to me that you think that whiteboard coding tests "communication", in any way. It's not like a presentation, or anything. It's one-sided combat where someone with a secret tries to get someone who doesn't know the secret to regurgitate the secret, on the spot, while pretending that s/he didn't memorize the secret in advance while cramming a great big "Cracking the Programmer Secret" book to prepare for t…

> I guarantee that 80% of working "rockstar coders" will fail (but not before whining, crankily, about how unfair it is that you would actually make them do such a useless thing, since, y'know...never actually documents anything IRL, dude). Are you sure you're not just replacing one stereotype with another here? Do you think it's fair to say that 80% of people who do well at whiteboard coding value documenting their…

I think that was hyperbole for emphasis, not a strong generalization as you imply. I've met and worked with plenty of programers up and down the scale of ability who think "code is self documenting."

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#184

Post by xyzzy123 »

remoteorbust wrote: post #45
bradenb wrote: post #2

VP of Engineering at Eaze, previously CTO at Getable and engineer at Yammer. No, not at all. Whiteboard interviews test one thing well: How well does a candidate code on a whiteboard. Engineers on my team never have to code on a whiteboard (whiteboards are really bad at running code), why would I make candidates do something that I don't ask the engineers already on my team to do? This comes close, but I think the re…

> Whiteboard interviews test one thing well: How well does a candidate code on a whiteboard. What if you consider part of someone's job to be communicating concepts to people, possibly with the help of visual aids and diagrams? I hate this concept that if it's not typing code into an editor then it's not "real work". I absolutely communicate with my coworkers using a whiteboard and pseudocode. I reject the idea that…

Never seen anyone write code on a whiteboard at work.

Do write lots of sequence diagrams, block diagrams, ui sketches, arch diagrams and very occasionally someone might draw a data structure.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#185

Post by czinck »

privacypoller wrote: post #57

All of these interviewing "tools" (or tricks) attempt to be time/cost efficient proxies for doing the damn job, and they all suck. * Whiteboard coding is awesome for software development shops that don't actually own computers or use punch cards to load programs. * Shared coding environments with a time limit works well when you want to double screen for someone who can also diffuse suspicious packages that arrive at…

How did you follow "take-home tests suck" with "two day paid projects are great"? Sure you're at least compensated for your time but most employment agreements almost certainly block this (unless you're a contractor), and that's assuming I'm willing to use 2 vacation days to maybe get an offer.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#186

Post by mmt »

anonytrary wrote: post #105

I'd propose a supplement for interviewing. If your company has at least one open-source repository: 1. Have a senior engineer chat with the candidate for an hour about a few bugs/features in the repository, and how the candidate would solve them. 2. If the candidate is promising, give the candidate a week or so to fix the bugs or implement the features. I think this would be a more relevant test than just giving them…

Make it a paid project, and it at least partially addresses the sibling comment's (valid, IMO) complaint that it filters out candidates that are otherwise in high demand.

It would also provide a significant signal regarding valuing the candidate's time and effort [1], which would comply with the suggestion of another comment elsewhere in the thread.

[1] As well as the additional signal of putting money, rather than just "free" candidate labor into open source.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#187

Post by dsr_ »

xyzzy123 wrote: post #184
remoteorbust wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whiteboard interviews test one thing well: How well does a candidate code on a whiteboard. What if you consider part of someone's job to be communicating concepts to people, possibly with the help of visual aids and diagrams? I hate this concept that if it's not typing code into an editor then it's not "real work". I absolutely communicate with my coworkers using a whiteboard and pseudocode. I reject the idea that…

Never seen anyone write code on a whiteboard at work. Do write lots of sequence diagrams, block diagrams, ui sketches, arch diagrams and very occasionally someone might draw a data structure.

This. Plus network diagrams, message passing sequences, and first drafts of checklists.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#189

Post by davidw »

loxias wrote: post #157
privacypoller wrote: post #57

All of these interviewing "tools" (or tricks) attempt to be time/cost efficient proxies for doing the damn job, and they all suck. * Whiteboard coding is awesome for software development shops that don't actually own computers or use punch cards to load programs. * Shared coding environments with a time limit works well when you want to double screen for someone who can also diffuse suspicious packages that arrive at…

I agree with much of what you say, heck, nearly all of it -- but it's not reasonable to expect, or even ask for a _very_ short paid project. I see no reason that a possible employer should pay actual money for some useless task. If it's very short, then almost by definition it's useless. That being said I've had great results from doing, say, a tiny consulting project, and ending up with full time employment. The bes…

> I see no reason that a possible employer should pay actual money for some useless task.

My time is valuable. I see no reason to work on a useless task for free.

Re: Engineering whiteboard interviews: yay or nay?

#190

Post by ordinaryperson »

Having just been through this process (landed a new job after a 2-month search), the worst part about whiteboard coding is how humiliated you feel if you don't get it right or don't know where to start. Is it really necessary to do that to candidates?

I've been doing this for 15+ years professionally, have a master's in CS and I struggled to answer many questions. Just stood there blinking like a goldfish.

If companies really wanted to simulate programming work, you'd give me 10-30 minutes to Google the problem because THAT'S HOW IT WORKS IN REAL LIFE. Which is how it should be; rarely are you solving a new problem, usually other people have faced it before, it's probably far more efficient to start with a known working solution and iterate from there.

Look, of course there things you should know. Data structures, algorithm basics, some complexity theory, etc. But asking me to output numbers in a matrix in a spiral fashion does not translate into real-world ability.

I find the more important developer skills are people skills and project management skills. How well do you work with others? How do you resolve conflicts? What's your methodology for grouping work-- Jira tickets, sprints, etc?

But almost none of the interviewers seemed to care. They wanted to know what exotic technology skills I had, not that I could work with project managers and marketers effectively.

Take-home projects are more time-consuming but the least unfair, whereas whiteboard coding is the shortest but most unfair.

I blame Google for this curse. I hope the next time I go looking for a job this process has changed.

Post reply on HN