Codility test as part of job interview
-
What the hell is a Codility test?
If it's not broken, fix it until it is. Everything makes sense in someone's mind. Ya can't fix stupid.
Kevin Marois wrote:
What the hell is a Codility test?
:laugh: I actually read it the way the OP intended, codability. I did not see the misspelling until reading your post. :-D
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data. There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
-
Hi, I have been asked to take a Codility test. Anybody has experience with that? It looks like most people hate it.
Yeah, I did one a few years ago. It totally sucked and was a waste of my time. I was presented with three problems and scored zero because my style is to do things right. I started into two of the three and ran out of time because I have the awful habit of thinking too much (the third problem was never going to fit into the [short] time allotted). Anyway, I write beautiful code and that company missed a good opportunity.
-
The purpose of the programming interview is to find programmers you can work with successfully. The purpose of HR is to get the programmers skills at the lowest possible cost. These objectives are orthogonal and sadly have resulted in the modern version of the white board coding interview, the programmers test. In my experience good programmers are ones that love programming and solving problems. If they are not working for you they are most likely working on a side project, reading or writing code or something else programming related. With them programming is not a job its something they are. These types of people hate programmer tests. Why? Because they understand that the test has little or nothing to do with solving their current problem which is, "how do I get a job, preferably one I will like, where I get to do what I love doing." The best way I have found to hire talented programmers is to sit down and just talk with them about programming. Good programmers will quickly warm to the subject and before you know it you will be talking about solving problems, new constructs, theory, developmental approaches and so on. You might even learn something new! Good programmers love to program and to talk about programming. They just don't like to waste time solving solved problems to which the solutions could be found in seconds with a simple Google search. You will learn more from a simple 10 minute conversation than days and days of these tests. The argument always comes up in these discussions that we, "Need to filter out" those candidates that don't have the skills. Really? Are you telling me you can't tell within five minutes if the candidate does not have the skills? Is your time so valuable that you can't spare a couple of minutes on the phone to determine this? if so then maybe you should be focusing on that important work that you need to do and leave the hiring to someone else.
Kelly
Nice assessment. When conducting interviews, I used to spend 10-15 minutes talking to the candidate, then ask them to go to the white board and write a simple function [e.g., reverse a string]. Found a number of great candidates that way. One may love programming but if one cannot converse/discuss a [small] problem then one is likely to fail in a group setting.
-
The same advice for when you discover that the person you're dating is a narcissist. Run. OK, why? Well first off, these tests, besides being irrelevant (like the way the Borg uses the word) are also fraught with errors and omissions (like Trump's world view) and tell you an important thing about the company -- they can't figure out how to do an interview and give you meaningful questions themselves, so instead they rely on a "test" which tells them actually nothing about your coding, problem solving, and communication skills. It's a good insight into the internal mess of the company.
Latest Article - Class-less Coding - Minimalist C# and Why F# and Function Programming Has Some Advantages Learning to code with python is like learning to swim with those little arm floaties. It gives you undeserved confidence and will eventually drown you. - DangerBunny Artificial intelligence is the only remedy for natural stupidity. - CDP1802
-
It all depends on the situation. I used to date a doctor in Orange County when I first moved to Los Angeles, and when she changed jobs they'd fly her in and put her up in a hotel near the hospital being considered for the interview. The interview!! They didn't test her with a live on-site patient, etc. I was thinking damn we get short changed in tech. However, the barrier to entry is much much lower in tech. Yes a great programmer has to study just as much as a doctor. But the barrier to entry is lower. We don't have to pay for medical school and go to it for 8 years. We basically just need a computer and an Internet connect and no life. What does this mean for the market? It means there are a lot of people full of crap in the market place. Try hiring a few programmers and you'll see. They regurgitate something they read on MSDN and think they're pros now. Real talent is hard to find. Being a great programmer is still a valuable skill to have but you have to go through a lot of weeds. And so we have tests. In my experiences if the tests are given by someone technical and friendly they are usually fun. I remember a buddy of mine from Florida who was my manager at the time. Super smart guy when it came to dealing with people and we'd joke around with the online test when screening new people. If they're given by someone that doesn't know a left mouse click from a right one then it's annoying and not even generally relevant. To top it off, if you generalize conceptual answers that shows you understand the whys instead of blanket memorization, they don't get it because they don't know tech. I actually did an interview not too long ago where I was sent a JScript .NET test for a JavaScript position. I told them that's the wrong test. They changed it out to a JavaScript one and then I took that one. That didn't pan out despite me passing the test because it was amateur hour with these people, and I told them as such. But, if they're good at what they do then look at it like a chance to help show your stuff, to give you a marketing edge for the job. That's where the industry is at right now, so you're just going to have to deal with it.
Jeremy Falcon
Yes, but ... There are some clowns out there (and they have people's ears) that go around saying you should hire 4 or 5 "low-ballers", and keep the one that produces the "best product". The reasoning here being that by buying a "bunch" of cheap labor (versus one "expensive" professional), the "probability" of you getting what you wanted is increased because there are more "bodies" involved. Clients "new" to freelancing are swallowing it.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then". ― Blaise Pascal
-
Yeah, I did one a few years ago. It totally sucked and was a waste of my time. I was presented with three problems and scored zero because my style is to do things right. I started into two of the three and ran out of time because I have the awful habit of thinking too much (the third problem was never going to fit into the [short] time allotted). Anyway, I write beautiful code and that company missed a good opportunity.
You're right - you have to write the code the way they want it written. Codility and other online coding testing sites are proof that they're lazy and don't know how to hire engineers. I've seen many gross mistakes in problems and fail to see what value it really provides outside of stealing money from HR. Seriously though - I just find a topic or two on their resume and drill down into it. I ask to provide a diagram of the system, go into design issues, problems they ran into, how they were resolved, etc. It's more effective and much harder to fake.
"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." -- Marcus Brigstocke, British Comedian
-
Hi, I have been asked to take a Codility test. Anybody has experience with that? It looks like most people hate it.
At one time, the PAT (Programmer Aptitude Test) was simply a variation of some of the IQ tests available then and now; emphasizing abstract thinking and lanuage comprehension. These IMO were better for showing a candidate's "potential" than their ability to pass a canned test. I think at one time people were hired for their potential; not past deeds; or that they're cheaper. But with short-range thinking (and a disposable society), you don't need long-term potential.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then". ― Blaise Pascal
-
The purpose of the programming interview is to find programmers you can work with successfully. The purpose of HR is to get the programmers skills at the lowest possible cost. These objectives are orthogonal and sadly have resulted in the modern version of the white board coding interview, the programmers test. In my experience good programmers are ones that love programming and solving problems. If they are not working for you they are most likely working on a side project, reading or writing code or something else programming related. With them programming is not a job its something they are. These types of people hate programmer tests. Why? Because they understand that the test has little or nothing to do with solving their current problem which is, "how do I get a job, preferably one I will like, where I get to do what I love doing." The best way I have found to hire talented programmers is to sit down and just talk with them about programming. Good programmers will quickly warm to the subject and before you know it you will be talking about solving problems, new constructs, theory, developmental approaches and so on. You might even learn something new! Good programmers love to program and to talk about programming. They just don't like to waste time solving solved problems to which the solutions could be found in seconds with a simple Google search. You will learn more from a simple 10 minute conversation than days and days of these tests. The argument always comes up in these discussions that we, "Need to filter out" those candidates that don't have the skills. Really? Are you telling me you can't tell within five minutes if the candidate does not have the skills? Is your time so valuable that you can't spare a couple of minutes on the phone to determine this? if so then maybe you should be focusing on that important work that you need to do and leave the hiring to someone else.
Kelly
NightPen wrote:
Are you telling me you can't tell within five minutes if the candidate does not have the skills?
That's the problem... we would, but most big companies where the departments are so specialized... the HR has no fvcking clue about technology beyond SmartPhone, Office and maybe a couple of things more. If you are lucky, the HR will be an advanced user, but still no programmer.
M.D.V. ;) If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about? Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
-
Yes, but ... There are some clowns out there (and they have people's ears) that go around saying you should hire 4 or 5 "low-ballers", and keep the one that produces the "best product". The reasoning here being that by buying a "bunch" of cheap labor (versus one "expensive" professional), the "probability" of you getting what you wanted is increased because there are more "bodies" involved. Clients "new" to freelancing are swallowing it.
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then". ― Blaise Pascal
-
This goes beyond just coding. HR has adopted the "warm body" mentality. Get a body in, set them in front of a computer for a couple of hours of online training, and viola! Instant efficient worker! I abhor HR people in case you can't tell...