TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

We analyzed thousands of interviews on everything from language to code style

261 点作者 emilong将近 8 年前

16 条评论

Jemaclus将近 8 年前
&gt; Furthermore, no matter what, poor technical ability seems highly correlated with poor communication ability – regardless of language, it’s relatively rare for candidates to perform well technically but not effectively communicate what they’re doing (or vice versa), largely (and fortunately) debunking the myth of the incoherent, fast-talking, awkward engineer.<p>My interpretation of this is that interviewees who can communicate clearly about code (whether they wrote it or not) correlate with high technical ability. Does this suggest that rather than having the interviewee write code on the spot, one could give them some new code they&#x27;ve never seen before and ask them to reason about it aloud for 30 minutes, then gauge their technical ability based on their ability to communicate clearly about the code?<p>In other words, could you replace live-coding with &quot;here&#x27;s some code, tell me about it&quot;?
评论 #14555312 未加载
评论 #14555822 未加载
评论 #14556819 未加载
评论 #14554840 未加载
评论 #14556493 未加载
评论 #14555580 未加载
评论 #14557025 未加载
评论 #14554939 未加载
评论 #14555078 未加载
评论 #14556675 未加载
评论 #14556398 未加载
评论 #14555958 未加载
评论 #14557086 未加载
评论 #14554933 未加载
评论 #14556871 未加载
skylark将近 8 年前
Overall, the data lines up with my own intuition, but I thought I might throw my own interpretation into the ring.<p>One of the biggest keys to doing well on technical interviews is to completely separate the problem solving from the coding. The strongest interviewers will discuss the problem and solve it at an abstract level using diagrams. Once satisfied with the solution, they&#x27;ll code the entire thing making few mistakes.<p>I think this is what drives most of those metrics. Strong interviewers submit code later, and have a higher chance of it being correct because they take the time to problem solve upfront. Their thought process seems more clear because there isn&#x27;t the iteration of &quot;this should work, let me code it, oh no wait, that&#x27;s wrong, let me erase this now...&quot;
评论 #14557111 未加载
评论 #14558658 未加载
评论 #14556109 未加载
NumberCruncher将近 8 年前
&gt;&gt; An average, successful candidates interviewing in Python define 3.29 functions, whereas unsuccessful candidates define 2.71 functions. This finding is statistically significant.<p>The &quot;average&quot; is too sensitive to outliers and should not be used for such a comparison...<p>[Edit] Being bored I calculated the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistic based on the chart. It is between 10%-10.5%. The number of defined funtions seems to be a significant but weak indicator.
评论 #14555956 未加载
评论 #14555967 未加载
janwillemb将近 8 年前
The title is quite clickbaity: &quot;We analyzed thousands of technical interviews on everything from language to code style. Here’s what we found.&quot;<p>What&#x27;s wrong with this, I think, is that a (journalistic) title should give an ultra-condensed summary of the main point of the article. This title suggests that the authors gathered a lot of data but didn&#x27;t find much.<p>(I find myself quite intrigued by clickbaity titles somehow, sorry for that.)
zebraflask将近 8 年前
A lot of this article rings true with my experience. And I agree with the comments dinging live coding tests - those are the worst. I can&#x27;t code effectively unless I&#x27;m calm and can concentrate, and these things are almost designed to get you off-balance.<p>Even more galling when you have a healthy GitHub portfolio that they refuse to even look at in favor of a quiz (this has happened recently).
评论 #14556916 未加载
评论 #14557922 未加载
Radim将近 8 年前
<i>&quot;Poor technical ability seems highly correlated with poor communication ability&quot;</i><p>Yep. Articulate attention is the name of the game (where &quot;communication ability&quot; sounds a little nebulous).<p>If you can&#x27;t organize your thoughts, bring them to the forefront of your attention, name them, you&#x27;re likely bad at handling abstractions. And abstractions are at the core of &quot;technical ability&quot; -- the ability to name things, find the appropriate abstraction boundaries, chisel structure out of chaos.<p>Articulate speech is the greatest human invention for a reason.<p>Testing for that (plus conscientiousness -- can you pay attention to details and get shit done?) during interviews makes perfect sense.
评论 #14558319 未加载
FLUX-YOU将近 8 年前
If you filter the interviews to only interviewees who:<p>- liked the person<p>- rated the questions 3 or 4 stars<p>- gave the interviewer 3 or 4 stars for being helpful<p>Do the trends still hold?<p>How are those trends compared to only looking at interviews with:<p>- disliked the person<p>- rated the questions 1 or 2 stars<p>- gave the interviewer 1 or 2 stars for being helpful
thenanyu将近 8 年前
Judging by this graph in the article, and somewhat counter to the claim in the article: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;plot.ly&#x2F;~aline_interviewingio&#x2F;952.png?share_key=HtksI4SyhXQRrGVr7Qo06i" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;plot.ly&#x2F;~aline_interviewingio&#x2F;952.png?share_key=Htks...</a><p>Looks to me that interview length <i>is</i> correlated with success rate. If your interviewer stops before 60 minutes, there&#x27;s a bias towards successful interviews. It seems like the interviews that end up being &quot;no&quot;s tend to get hard-stopped right at the 1-hour mark.
pklausler将近 8 年前
I like to ask one question that probes basic analytic ability and a second question that probes programming aptitude. Generally, the first question either takes 3-5 minutes or the whole 45-50. It&#x27;s usually a problem of the form &quot;write a predicate (Boolean-valued) expression that is true when...&quot; applied to something simple, and it&#x27;s a basic test of being able to use relations and logical operations to characterize a situation. It&#x27;s depressing how many great-looking candidates with awesome degrees, resumes, and phone-screen performances get stuck trying to describe how to tell whether two calendar entries (just start&#x2F;end times) conflict with each other.
javabean22将近 8 年前
Here is a hint. If you aren&#x27;t a fresh graduate avoid companies making you code in a browser under a time pressure.
crobertsbmw将近 8 年前
None of the graphs are loading for me. It says &quot;If the problem persists, open an issue at support.plot.ly&quot; Unfortunately, I have to pay money to file reports...
评论 #14554886 未加载
评论 #14554894 未加载
评论 #14554727 未加载
tptacek将近 8 年前
One of the language results doesn&#x27;t make sense. It claims that it matters, significantly, if you solve interview problems in Java when the hiring company is a Java shop, but not when the hiring company is a C++ shop.<p>But that&#x27;s reversed. It is in fact fairly difficult for a high-level language programmer to pick up C++, and facility with C++ (or at least C) is a common, accepted goal for C++ hiring shops. A C++ shop that hired candidates without regard for their aptitude <i>at C++</i> would have real problems.
评论 #14559082 未加载
评论 #14560356 未加载
bovermyer将近 8 年前
There&#x27;s just one problem: this assumes that code challenges are present in all (engineering) interviews.
leeny将近 8 年前
Graphs have been fixed! Sorry about that, HNers.
评论 #14556850 未加载
评论 #14556046 未加载
评论 #14555466 未加载
评论 #14556418 未加载
Joboman555将近 8 年前
These people are not particularly good at interpreting statistics.
评论 #14569353 未加载
snissn将近 8 年前
What is the blue bar on top of the page?
评论 #14555785 未加载