I think it translates to solving day-to-day problems. I don't think I could trust someone who couldn't figure out the binary tree thing cold, to figure out that some Spring bean is not request scoped by looking at the object reference, or that openapi code generator is looking in the wrong folder, or a dozen other things that require some mental effort and can't be googled easily.
If I’m responsible for it then I should have some experience with it and understand the code already. I can call upon other resources outside my own brain.
It’s certainly not being forced to recall the implementation details of a trie within 30 minutes, when I haven’t seen one in 5 years, unable to reference any docs or knowledge base, or use Google, knowing that if I fail I will remain unemployed.
The context of this thread is a very basic question that any good programmer should be able to bang out in 15 minutes. It's much closer to something you "should have some experience with" than "implementation details of a trie"
If by "most" you mean people in this very thread who are claiming that binary trees is some crazy obscure thing that nobody can be expected to be familiar with, then sure.
Maybe. But you don't ask someone to "figure out a binary tree cold"...you ask them to do it while talking and coding on a video call (sigh).
Go solve a hard puzzle while talking on the phone. Does it make you better or worse? I'm just saying...if someone needs a hint for the trick, but then, post-reveal, bangs out the code under the same circumstances, isn't that telling you something interesting?
Just wait until the OP freezes during a "easy programming problem" as an interviewee. I have been interviewed more times in my life that anyone I know. I have failed sooooooo many different ways -- all unique. Some days, you get lucky and can solve a brutally hard algo problem. The next day, you fail trying to reverse a string, or something equally as embarassing. Tech interviewing is a numbers game; that's it. I do it enough until I have a very good day and someone gives me an offer that I like.
It is prep game. You train all common interview questions, do mock interviews with friends, prepare answers for common culture fit questions, research company interview process online, tailor cover latter and ask people for recommendations from previous jobs.
What people do instead is spray and pray CVs and hope that hiring manger uncover their brilliance under surface level incompetence.
If the winning candidate has to "train all the common interview questions" (of which there are thousands), then what are you actually learning by asking the questions to the winning candidates?
I think the main issue is that people would much rather spend their free time learning or building something useful, rather than the "prep game." A more skilled, knowledgeable workforce would benefit the corporate overlords as well, but we can't have that due to the broken interview system.
You change job every few years, spend majority of walking hours in job and your financials directly depends on job. Why would you not spend time on prep.
I have no sympathy for people posting "jobless for months and reject coding test interview" in one sentence.
