Earlier quoted context omitted.
>They must have a degree from an accredited institution before they can begin practicing, and part of earning the degree is operating on cadavers, so, yes. You know what I meant. You have merely created a series of strawmen. They don't need to perform a trial surgery every time they interview for a new job. The same goes for all my examples so nice try.
In every profession that is relatively high stakes, there is a pretty concrete chain of validation that the person can do the thing they claim to be able to do and that chain of validation does indeed rest on demonstrated performance at that capability. Yes, a surgeon doesn't need to perform traial surgeries every time they change jobs. But, also, they only work inside certified, heavily-regulated institutations that…
Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
621–630 of 679 posts
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#622Earlier quoted context omitted.
We recently interviewed a candidate, with 7 years of experience at a FAANG company, fail a really basic coding interview and we don't even make you write code. I have no idea what these people expect. We ask coding questions, we have basic programming skills as a requirement, what do they think will happen if they get the job? Do they expect to just magically learn the required skills or hope that nobody will notice…
Do you think working at a FANG would make you a better developer? I’m sorry but I think that’s a bad expectation, hire from a startup if you want great developers, their span of control and influence is much wider. Most of us at FANG are pigeon holed into a very narrow topic, have to work with really annoying, slow and complex internal build systems. And write very little actual code. Also, unless you have global sca…
Kinda the same idea as having Harvard or Stanford as your alma matter. Most schools will teach you most of the same stuff, but those universities only take the "best". If your idea of "best" is similar, you'd take that Harvard also liked the person as a good signal.
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#623Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're completely ignoring the reality of frauds. Jeff Atwood was writing about this over a decade ago with "FizzBuzz". There are many people who spend more effort creating the illusion of competence on paper and on the job, getting harder to detect the higher they go. We as a profession (software engineers) have continually resisted broad unified certification like other engineers which could be a replacemen…
>even then it sometimes fails How can a code interview fail? Hidden earpiece?
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#624Earlier quoted context omitted.
> people with licenses still do interviews, often just as grueling The licensed engineers I know think software interviews are insane.
And most mech/ee make <150k. A closer comparison is IB.
Most software developers make [1] https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151252.htm
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#625Earlier quoted context omitted.
I totally understand your point of view, but looking at it from the other side it’s not as simple. We had candidates with 10+ years of experience in their resume, talking to them it seemed they know what they’re doing, they showed some of the code they’ve supposedly written. Then they got hired and it turned out they can’t code - their PRs are below junior level, constant bugs, communication is abysmal, they overshoo…
The IT job market is a two sided lemon market, people may lie on their CV but companies can be very abusive as well. If you don't do what OP suggests, people will not respect you. I've had five developers join my interview call to see if I can implement a palindrome checker. This is proof that non of them bothered to read my CV and check out my github projects. This is not respectful, and you have to stand your groun…
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#626Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aren't probationary periods pretty standard, in many/all industries and countries too not just software?
Yes and such a system makes hiring so much easier because mistakes cost much less. But the US ties things like healthcare to employment so a company that has a reputation for firing people after hiring them (however legitimate) would probably be one people would avoid. In Sweden, for example, I’ve found interviews so much more reasonable. Then again, I had healthcare there regardless of employment.
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#627Earlier quoted context omitted.
> yet they thought they needed to hire people who could turn any O(N^2) algorithms into O(N) or O(Nlog(N)) And the great irony is that most software is slow as shit and resource intensive. Because yeah, knowing worst case performance is good to know, but what about mean? Or what you expect users to be doing? These can completely change the desired algorithm. But there's the long joke "10 years of hardware advancement…
Many software programs fail to achieve ultimate efficiency either because the software engineers are unable to do so, or because external factors prevent them from achieving it. I believe that in most cases, it is the latter.
IME the most underrated optimization tool is the delete command. People don't realize that it's something you should frequently do. Delete a function, file, or even a code base. Some things just need to be rewritten. Hell, most things I write are written several times. You do it for an essay or any writing, why is code different?
Yeah, we have "move fast and break things" but we also have "clean up, everybody do their share." If your manager is pushing you around, ignore them. Manage your manager. You clean your room don't you? If most people's code was a house it'd be infested with termites and mold. It's not healthy. It wants to die. Stop trying to resuscitate it and let it die. Give birth to something new and more beautiful.
In part I think managers are to blame because they don't have a good understanding but also engineers are to blame for enabling the behavior and not managing your managers (you need each other, but they need you more).
I'll even note that we jump into huge code bases all the time, especially when starting out. Rewriting is a great way to learn that code! (Be careful pushing upstream though and make sure you communicate!!!) Even if you never push it's often faster in the long run. Sure, you can duct tape shit together but patch work is patch work, not a long term solution (or even moderate).
And dear God, open source developers, take your issues seriously. I know there's a lot of dumb ones, but a lot of people are trying to help and wanting to contribute. Every issue isn't a mark of failure, it's a mark of success because people are using your work. If they're having a hard time understanding the documentation, that's okay, your docs can be improved. If they want to do something your program can't, that's okay and you can admit that and even ask for help (don't fucking tell them it does and move on. No one's code is perfect, and your ego is getting in the way of your ego. You think you're so smart you're preventing yourself from proving how smart you are or getting smarter!). Close stale likely resolved issues (with a message like "reopen if you still have issues") but dear god, don't just respond and close an issue right away. Your users aren't door to door salesmen or Jehovah's Witnesses. A little kindness goes a long way.
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#628Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have junior and senior students that struggle with fizzbuzz... But damn, are they not allowed to even do a lazy inefficient `sort(mylist)[-2]` if they forgot about for loops? That's the most efficient in terms of number of characters, right haha But I still think you can reasonably weed these people out without these whiteboard problems. For exactly the same reasons engineers and scientists can. And let's be honest…
Using GitHub is discriminatory against people who don’t code on the weekends outside of their jobs, and most people’s job related code would be under NDA and not postable on Github. To be a capital E Engineer you have to pass a licensing exam. This filter obviously is not going to catch everything but it does raise the bar a little bit. —- As far as the root question goes, they are allowed to propose that, and then i…
But getting people to explain projects they did and challenges they faced can still be done. We do it with people who have worked on classified stuff all the time. If you're an expert it's hard for people to bullshit you about your domain expertise. Leet code is no different. It doesn't test if you really know the stuff, it tests how well you can memorize and do work that is marginally beneficial in order to make your boss happy. Maybe that's what you want. But it won't get you the best engineers.
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#629Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not saying it should be mandatory, but they would have to show mastery some other way. Whiteboard? Live coding? Project? I think a side project opens up the opportunity to skip that for a project presentation. This is a lot more in line with real life as you would typically code and later present that work to others. You would defend it to some degree, why you made choice A vs choice B. If you created it, you'll…
> I'm not saying it should be mandatory, but they would have to show mastery some other way. Whiteboard? Live coding? Project? godelski said your resume should really be GitHub. You could have said this instead of sarcasm.
If I had a company I'd offer looking over an existing project or a project where you create a side project of your choice without any further direction.
So not mandatory but the easiest way to go probably. Once you apply to my company you'll have one to show for next time at least.
(If you want to write the project out on the whiteboard instead I guess feel free, that seems hard though.)
Re: Coding interviews are stupid (ish)
#630The 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.
You could view the trial-by-Leetcode that people undergo when they switch jobs every 4 years or so as a form of relicensing. One advantage that the current setup has over officially proctored examinations is that you get to try again repeatedly until you are successful.
Real licenses do not expire without notice. Real license exams are more consistent, have clear pass criteria, and have higher pass rates.