31–40 of 133 posts
[flagged]
It's a very practicable metric that enables you to show that you're worth getting a top job in interviews. It's very merit based even if that merit is less being a good SWE and more being good at problem solving + self discipline.
> I have written more code than most people and I still will be judged for not being able to solve a coding question Why would you fail it though if you have written more code than most people (assuming most people means most people in tech and not most people worldwide in general since most people are not software developers), and published in A* venues
I'm so glad I'm on the ops side where these kinds of games aren't common. At best you'll get some light Linux userspace trivia.
> I have written more code than most people and I still will be judged for not being able to solve a coding question Why would you fail it though if you have written more code than most people (assuming most people means most people in tech and not most people worldwide in general since most people are not software developers), and published in A* venues
The point is that LeetCode does not test the actual skill set of writing useful code, it tests how much you’ve grinded LeetCode.
Academia has a problem with possibly fraudulent papers and grade inflation. It is inevitable that companies won't trust the papers and grades/degrees like they did in the past.
I have been on both side of the recruitment process. I wrote some technical tests. The thing is, it is very hard to evaluate someone level with synthetic test, and leetcode, a.k.a hope-you-know-the-right-algo-for-this-question, type of test are, in my experience, amongst the worse (especially if live-coded or timed).
This type of test will filter out a lot of competent dev, because let's be honest, most dev don't need to be able to come up on the spot with a dynamic programming solution to a completely synthetic problem.
And I also find that algorithmic / programming skill are often way less important for a SWE than good communication, transparency, the ability to learn, ... Unless you working on a product where performance is absolutely critical, I find that having a difficult technical test that is a go/no go, yield worst result.
Just to give some balance here, I'll state a seemingly unpopular opinion. Personally, I have not had issues doing complex coding questions in interviews, or at work. And it becomes clear pretty quickly on the job, when your co-worker has weak computer science fundamentals. Reasoning from first principles is a very powerful technique.
Experience is not equally distributed given any context. Well rounded people overall have been the best to work with.
Optimizing for a single variable is a very powerful technique of the stupid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a very practicable metric that enables you to show that you're worth getting a top job in interviews. It's very merit based even if that merit is less being a good SWE and more being good at problem solving + self discipline.
But 10-15 years experience has to count for something. Why do senior and principle positions still need to leet code interviews?
With social skills and salesmanship, you can never have delivered top-class work even after 15 years as a developer.
Quite a few people know how to "play the game". That's pretty easy if your superiors have no idea about software development themselves.
Who came up with this scam? From all I hear the quality of engineering at these FAANGs has not been increasing.
If you think something you have to do in an interview is “humiliating” when all they’re asking you to do is demonstrate some skill on a whiteboard you have some self-reflection to do. I don’t personally think leetcode is that great for interviews but candidates who act like it’s above them to figure out problems etc have a serious problem. In other fields this is not only completely normal but absolutely something pe…
It's true. But acting like you're above the work also doesn't help you.