Live data from Hacker News

Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

darrenkopp.com

201–210 of 679 posts

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#201

This was an interesting observation: > What I do know, however, is that for every 1-hour interview where I evaluated if someone knew their data structures, I could have just taught them. I don't really hear much about training. I doubt it's because we don't do it, but maybe it's not an interesting topic for discussion.

I dropped out of school (English literature) because I needed to make money and pay bills due to a life change, and i applied at a place that does internet stuff to do tech support because computers were a big part of my hobbies. I moved up over the years learning as I went and now I've occupied a few 'engineering' roles. I used to feel somewhat embarrassed to hold an engineering role with no engineering degree.

But I stopped worrying the more I worked with software engineers. They were just people, some sucked, some were great, their education almost never had anything to do with the bracket they fell into. The worst one I've ever met has a PhD. The best one I've met also has a PhD.

Then I found more people in these positions that have degrees or no degrees, and the people that work well both with degrees and without had something in common. They can more or less be taught to do anything, they can extrapolate and apply knowledge outside of the specific example initially given, and they understand the big picture/desired end results. I hate to say it so crass, but they are good at identifying the trivial bullshit and addressing it or cutting through it rather than sitting in it. They "Get it." From the ideal to what the business demands, they just get it.

Training competent people is a boon. I don't know how you seek out interested/curious competency and then train it, but if we can figure that out, it'd be cool. I'm really tired of working with people who have degrees and jobs because their mothers told them it pays well. Computer Scientists with no interest or curiosity about computers.

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#202
post #45
post #34

I'm a believer in Joel Spolsky's recruiting goal: "Smart and gets things done."[0] Add "not a jerk" (which I find is part of "gets things done" on an ongoing basis) and everything else is either vanity or decision paralysis on the part of the interviewer. [0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2007/06/05/smart-and-gets-thi...

The article is from someone whose final-boss interview was with...joel spolsky. And it was a pretty useless-in-the-real-world question he was given as a coding exercise (base -2 number conversion).

Yeah interview before Joel was base -2 conversion. Joel's interview was mostly a chat and we mostly talked about my dog (and other things I'm sure but I only remember talking about dogs).

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#203

Classic mistake of overthinking it and failing to realize what interviewer really wants - which is to make sure the candidate can actually write code, like at all. The question itself doesn't really matter as much as it's just a pretext. I actually asked a variation of this question for many years at Google and it was clear within first 5 mins who has been writing code day-to-day and who's been mostly "brining key st…

Exactly this. In the interviews I give I care about whether the candidate can write code, yes, but also talk and think about code. The conversation is the most important part of the interview, and the thinking (and communication) is the most important thing I'm trying to judge after basic skills. Like you said, you can get a good sense within the first few lines of pseudocode if someone's at least competent at writin…

Coding tests are an awful place to test someone’s conversational skills. I don’t talk while I code. You don’t either. Honestly I can’t even remember the last time I talked to anyone about the code itself outside of a PR. People talk about architecture and database migrations and why their containers aren’t behaving locally. Nobody ever tests for that stuff.

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even in the US, "$400k" is almost certainly an outlier and not the typical case. Ever notice how people making these claims never provide data about actual comp distributions? I've been an engineer for almost 10 years and never had an offer come close to $400k per year.

Everyone on HN knows someone whose brother's uncle's girlfriend's nephew's former roommate works at Facebook and made $400K as a developer. And they'll point to that one person and say "See, it is possible to make $400K in tech." Yes, it is technically possible , just like it's possible to do plenty of difficult things. That doesn't make these salaries common. For every 1 person making $400K-800K at FAANG in the Bay…

[deleted]

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#205
post #28
post #10

The coding interview looks different when you view it for what it would be called in other industries: a licensure examination. It looks particularly insane to relicense for every single job you apply to. It also looks supremely unfair to have proctors for this exam with varying expectations and training to actually correctly administer it.

It would be nice. There are already too many devs and if we can lower that number by controlling the licensing our wages would also stay very high.

I personally think an industry-wide license would be an easier filter than requiring a degree: Schools don't often teach what you need to know, and sitting for an exam is a lot easier for the "I've been in the industry XX years without a degree."

It would also be easier for the industry to settle on some filters in the exam to block people who just SPAM job postings. For example, open jobs for doctors are only posted on websites that are available to doctors. There is no way for the general public to SPAM job listings for doctors.

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came looking for how this could possibly be solved. Could you help me understand? If the input is infinite and unordered and the task is to produce output in order, how do you know when it’s OK to start writing output?

Sorry, I was paraphrasing the question and not giving every detail that I received. They also stated that there are no gaps, the values increment by one, and start at zero.

How is that "in an unordered fashion"? It sounds pretty ordered to me!

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only in other countries than the US there are also these interviews and you make far from 400k :)

Even in the US, "$400k" is almost certainly an outlier and not the typical case. Ever notice how people making these claims never provide data about actual comp distributions? I've been an engineer for almost 10 years and never had an offer come close to $400k per year.

in the sfba, levels.fyi shows it roughly at 85%-ile, not everyone - but hardly extreme outlier

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#208

[flagged]

I very rarely see anyone try anything different in a 9-5 setting. People leave university, join their first job, and spend 3 years learning how to develop in one way, and only one way.

At-work choices are rarely choices, because you just do the next thing the same way as you did the last thing. If you step out of line, management will reel you back in. A 'big' change is switching from Spring to Micronaut (or vice versa).

Some examples: I have pretty strong opinions about ORMs vs SQL. It would be interesting to discuss that on the job with someone who knows both well. But the guy you'll be talking to won't have tried SQL (beyond that academic thing they learnt at uni).

Discussions about languages and types? "Java is good because it has types and JS doesn't" was the level of discourse I got at my first serious job.

Having side projects at least indicates that they can try things out first-hand, own their own feedback loop, experience some surprises, and not just mindlessly cargo-cult "best-practices".

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actual engineering licenses in the US have kind of solved this. There’s the easy exam that pretty much everyone passes eh e they get their degree (the FE), and then there’s the hard one that not even everyone attempts after a couple years of experience (the PE). And within each level, you specify your discipline (civil, mechanical, etc) and then are required to have deeper knowledge of several subfields within that d…

Difficult to apply a lot of that, when in reality there are nearly infinite combinations of domain knowledge, software knowledge, architecture knowledge with languages and platforms. Some requiring more or less depth than others. Software is a craft discipline... it would be better organized as a guild with reputation at stake in concert with endorsements. But then you risk what is effectively nepotism and politics.

you don't think other engineering disciplines have countless sub-areas of expertise?

Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)

#210
post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still haven’t met the guy who is an algorithms genius who can’t program, but I can guarantee a license isn’t going to solve that problem.

Programming is a very small part of the battle of being an effective software engineer. It leaves out: - communicating - teaching - dealing with ambiguity - navigating politics - working cross-functionally Most high level individual contributors at large tech companies don't even code.

i have experienced a lot of people who have convinced themselves they are adding value despite not coding, yes
Post reply on HN