[ProZsolt]

Doing interviews (as an interviewer) greatly reduced my impostor syndrome as a junior software engineer. When a guy interviewed with 10+ years of "experience" couldn't write a for loop was eye opening.

I work really bad under pressure and don't like memorizing algorithms. I hate programming anything complex on a whiteboard or anyway on-site.

Simple stuff, like your example is fine. It's a good way to weed out charlatans. A few points what I consider a good test:

* No previous algorithm knowledge required.

* No ticks.

* An average candidate should finish it in 5 minutes. (So we gave them 10 mins)

* It can be written in 10-15 lines.

* Pseudocode is fine

[safety-third]

I dislike pseudocode. I make candidates use an actual language because it smoke checks the ones who put X years of Y language. I don't demand perfection, just that the general shape be there.

[perl4ever]

Unlike some people, I'd be happy to spend a few hours over a few days writing some code for free in peace and tranquility. If I didn't have a job already, I'd be happy to prove myself for six months as a temp. I have never been in either situation and not excelled.

Why should this be inadequate to demonstrate technical skills?

[celticmusic]

Which would punish people like me who will work across 3-4 languages daily and therefore often forget or confuse which library call does what in what language.

[ProZsolt]

Same here. Sometimes I forgot how to define a class method. Is it def? Is it func?

I can write Rubyish, Goish, Pythonish or PHPish pseudocode, but the syntax will be only 90% correct. I remember distinguishing features(like Ruby blocks), but features that all language has always a blur.