←back to thread

123 points mooreds | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
lelanthran ◴[] No.45212622[source]
This works until you get to the point that your actual programming skills atrophy due to lack of use.

Face it, the only reason you can do a decent review is because of years of hard won lessons, not because you have years of reading code without writing any.

replies(7): >>45212731 #>>45212756 #>>45213395 #>>45213636 #>>45213875 #>>45213884 #>>45214429 #
MisterTea ◴[] No.45212731[source]
Coding interview of the future: "Show us how you would prompt this binary sort."
replies(3): >>45215094 #>>45215443 #>>45218553 #
1. brothrock ◴[] No.45218553[source]
I think this is better than many current coding interview methods. Assuming you have an agent setup to not give the interviewee the answer directly.

Of course there are times when you need someone extremely skilled at a particular language. But from my experience I would MUCH prefer to see how someone builds out a problem in natural language and have guarantees to its success. I’ve been in too many interviews where candidates trip over syntax, pick the wrong language, or are just not good at memorization and don’t want to look dumb looking things up. I usually prefer paired programming interviews where I cater my assistance to expectations of the position. AI can essentially do that for us.

replies(1): >>45221080 #
2. Herring ◴[] No.45221080[source]
Yeah research says the interview process should match the day to day expectations as closely as possible, even to a trial day/week/month. All these leetcode and tricky puzzles are very low on signal. They don't tell you how a person will do on the job at all, not to mention they're bad for women and minorities.
replies(1): >>45228113 #
3. brothrock ◴[] No.45228113[source]
preach. Take home assignments are another example. It gives huge bias towards those with free time.