Hacker News Reader

I've always been a fan of "walk the walk, then talk". Basically, do FizzBuzz first then follow up with questions. Reason being, if you can't do some basic coding than its not even worth the time of having a discussion. You are, after all, hiring for a coding based position.

View on HN

At my work we use Codility. Every applicant is given a link to a codility test and the decision to proceed to phone screen/etc is made based on their result. There are some exceptions made, i.e. it's not a flat "you need to score at least X" but it resolves the "can you actually write some code" question up front.

Doesn't seem very scalable if you have a lot of applicants (unless you let them do the test at home?).

I think asking for code samples up front is the best way to weed out those who aren't good candidates -- you can tell a lot about someone through their work.

A few places I've applied have given me coding challenges to work on from home. None has taken me more than an hour, were relatively simple and fun, and I've never failed to get an interview afterward. I'm not entirely sure what all of that means.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com