Can’t just be me, can it? Currently 0 for 3 on interviews because I can’t seem to get past the technical interview/test. Usually because of some crazy complicated algorithm question that’s never been relevant to anything I’ve ever had to do on the job in all my years coding.

Also, while I’m ranting: screw the usual non-answer when given feedback.

  • lysdexic@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    A few years ago I was in a hiring loop where four interviewers grilled me on a number of subjects, including algorithms and data structures. They asked me all sorts of trivia questions on assimptotic complexity of this and that algorithm, how to implement this and that, how to traverse stuff, etc. As luck would have it, I was hired. I spent a few years working for that company and not a single time did I ever implemented a data structure at all or wrote any sort of iterator. Not once.

    I did spend months writing stuff in an internal wiki.

    I can’t help but feel that those bullshit leetcode data structures computational complexity trivia are just a convoluted form of ladder-pulling.

    • cgtjsiwy@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      My workplace has the opposite problem.

      The company has been in dire need of programmers for years, so they hired people (including myself) without tests. However, the work involves lots of custom iterators and the occasional handcrafted parser, which most of the company is incapable of writing. The bright side is that management has their metrics mostly right, so I’m getting lots of raises for solving fun problems.

  • souperk@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    don’t take tech interviews seriously, they suck for everyone but big corps

    your 2 decades of experience mean much more than memorizing algorithms, you know how to produce real value

    don’t forget that, and don’t let them forget it

    • lysdexic@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      your 2 decades of experience mean much more than memorizing algorithms, you know how to produce real value

      That’s all fine and dandy but the HR recruiter that can’t tell apart git from grunt needs to cross boxes in the skills assessment section, and if you don’t ace coding challenges you are as good as dead to them.

  • toasteecup@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If they ask a tech test question, it’s time to leave. When they act surprised, tell them you don’t believe in wasting your time with bullshit.

  • Decompose@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Don’t worry about the algorithm questions… companies asking that are just google-wannabe companies that don’t deserve you. I have always told recruiters “if there’s a time-limited interview test, I’m out”, and I’m doing very well for myself now.

    If you’re desperate, unfortunately, you have to pick up a book on algorithms… one of those 600 pages book, and start reading…

    • haruki@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Let’s be honest, even if you finish that 600-page book, you might not “crack” the algorithm interview. The inteview requires you to grind the question, or simply a lot of practices.

  • hairyballs@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I was so lucky in the interview for my current job: I’m working on a product with a big networking component, and I was asked to write an echo server with low level components. That was maybe the second time I had a test related to the job.

  • SirNuke@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, they kinda suck and they are brutal to go into cold. Having to grind a bunch of leetcode problems is a burden, particularly if you currently have a job and god forbid a family.

    I would still take them over the puzzle questions that used to be popular, or the personality test nonsense that dominates most fields. At least Leetcode problems are reasonably reflective of programming skill. I’ll also take them over vague open ended questions - ain’t nothing more fun than trying to ramble my way into whatever answer the interviewer is secretly looking for.

    Personally, when the day comes when I’m In Charge, I plan on experimenting with more day to day type evaluations. I think there’s potential for things like performing a mock code review or having someone plan out a sprint based on a very detailed design document. “Here’s an icky piece of code, tell me what it does and what you would do to improve it” seems to have fallen out of style, though it’s not clear to me why.

    That said, like it or not it’s how the game is played and not changing anytime soon. Get on the Grind75 train, or don’t and keep failing tech screens.

    • thesmokingman@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I have never found the ability to regurgitate Leetcode solutions as reflective of programming skill or even good performance. I’ve seen what talent I get from FAANG hires and what talent I get from random people with state degrees. Most of the time I will take the later. I have yet to staff some crazy R&D project that actually required anything like the things Cracking the Code Interview tells you to do.

      I’ve found a lot more success giving people reasonable design exercises based on company projects and code exercises related to actual work done. I have made a career of only taking jobs with similar interview processes and as I’ve grown into leadership I’ve continued to give interviews that accurately test day-to-day skills. Am I missing out on really good talent by usually ignoring FAANG resumes? So far I don’t think so and I don’t need those idiotic attitudes polluting strong, elastic teams either.

      • SirNuke@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I see them as a flawed indicator of the ceiling of someone’s theoretical computer science abilities. Having worked with some brilliant people that career shifted via bootcamps, I will contend there’s value in having that foundation. I also prefer Leetcode problems over having to memorize search algorithms. But yeah, it’s not very reflective of day to day tasks even in R&D heavy projects. The most algorithm heavy thing I’ve ever done was implement Ramer–Douglas–Peucker to convert points from mouse polling into a simplified line.

        (There’s clearly a “it’s what everyone else is doing” aspect to Leetcode, on top of being very practical to run, hence I why don’t see them going anywhere. They’re also as objective as anything in an interview will ever be, so as I always say: it can be so much worse.)

        I intend to make the hacker “dive into an icky codebase armed with a stack trace and fix a bug” aspect of software development a part of my interview process; plus lean more heavily on system design questions which is where non-entry level engineers really ought to shine. The parts that worry me are the ability to create new tests as they inevitably leak, plus whether I can truly objectively evaluate someone’s performance.

        I’m curious what you include and how well it works.

  • Peter@deddit.petersanchez.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I hope I never have to look for a job again but with the way my business has gone lately, I may need to start thinking about it in a few years.

    I’ve also been coding for 25 years, most of that professionally. I’m not sure I could pass a tech interview.

  • varsock@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    another problem with tech tests is how broad of scope they cover - like everything you’ve learned when pursuing your degree.

    Most other professional engineering disciplines have licensing obtained using FE and PE exams. Those exams are effectively “tech tests” equivalents but after passing them you get a license that you have to maintain. I can appreciate this approach since you can take CEU (continuing education) to maintain your license instead of taking the entire test all over again.

    I never though software engineers would need a license but I would MUCH rather prefer grind to obtain a license ONCE which then I can use to fulfill tech test requirements and maintain the license with much less effort throughout the year.

  • manapropos@lemmy.basedcount.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I simply refuse to move forward if the interview process involves a whiteboard interview. I have no aspirations to work at FAANG so this has only happened to me a couple of times

  • resin85@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    For a lot of these you need to study/practice on sites like HackerRank for a while first. Some companies go overboard and expect you to build some crazy recursive dynamic programming implementation in 15 mins without an IDE, others are more realistic and just want to see if you know things like algorithm complexity, can pick appropriate data structures, and write logical and clean code. And yes, very little of it applies to what most of us do day to day. Anyways, HackerRank is great for interview practice, you can Google for pretty much any solution to their questions.

  • thejodie@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sometimes those positions are meant for promoting internal candidates, who obviously sat in, conducting the same interviews in the past. So the difficulty is dialed up to “I am Death incarnate!” levels and they then have scoring data to support their selection of the internal candidate. At a friend’s workplace, they’d opened up a 2-3yr exp position to convert a great intern, and had some great 10+yr exp people apply. My friend said that was a little awkward. Even if Mark Russinovich or Linus Torvalds applied for that job, they still had no chance at getting it. I joked that I might put a resume in his manager’s pile for the creator of the tech stack they were interviewing for, just to hear how that reaction was.

    That’s probably not representing even… 5% of these gauntlets, but it might make you feel better. Sometimes, it’s the hiring manager fulfilling the letter but not the spirit of some process, but it means they are frustratingly hard on candidates in the process.

    And perhaps, ultimately, you have dodged some bullets.

  • nik9000@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    We ask algorithm questions and I feel bad about it. But a nontrivial portion of the job really is adapting these algorithms to novel scenarios. Not most of the job, but maybe the hardest part.