Every people says these, but what is the best objective way to know the candidate is good for position? Leetcode is still the best option imo.

Yeah its weird, because the whole point of having a system for hiring involving common questions, rubrics, etc is because at the end of the day you can either show that scoring well on the interview is correlated with higher end-of-year performance reviews or not show that and alter your interview system until it does.

Like you guys can keep posting these articles that have 0 statistical rigor. It's not going to change a process that came about because it had statistical significance.

Do remember, Google used to be known for asking questions like "How many piano tuners are in NYC". Those questions are gone not because somebody wrote a random article insulting them; they're going because somebody did actual math and showed they weren't effective.

Give them a real world simple use case where they have code and they have to fix real world code by making the unit test pass.

Never in almost 30 years of coding have I had to invert a b-tree or do anything approaching what leetCode tests for.

Well actually I did have to DS type code when writing low level cross platform C in the late 90s without a library.

But how many people have to do that today?

And how is leetCode testing the best way when all it tests for is someone’s ability to memorize patterns they don’t use in the real world?