[SteveDR]

> If I pass a coding test, stay at a company for a year, then apply to other companies, I'm going to subjected to coding tests even though I just passed one only a year ago.

Well it’s not like the company you’re applying to has access to the test results from the company you’re leaving

> It's like companies are afraid that programmers will spontaneously forget how to program.

To be fair, I think most leetcoders agree that you need to practice regularly to keep your skills up. So if the point is to see how good you are at thinking algorithmically for the job you’re applying for, it makes sense that they’d want to see recent test results.

[vsareto]

Well, the test result is pass/fail, and if you can verify I worked at a previous company, then you know I passed. The legwork might be finding out what their interview is like.

Every skill degrades without usage, but if you can verify that I've recently used it successfully, I'm not sure why I'm being tested on it again.

[antiterra]

> Well it’s not like the company you’re applying to has access to the test results from the company you’re leaving

Which is a better signal? Passing a leetcode style interview, or 5+ years in a development role at a reputable company?

[niyikiza]

Are you proposing waiving technical interviews for people who worked in "reputable" companies?

[jjav]

> Are you proposing waiving technical interviews for people who worked in "reputable" companies?

Yes, of course. If you have a degree from a recognized schools and many years of experience at the job, why would you be hazed on undergrad trivia you've forgotten decades ago?

None of my high school friends who went into accounting, finance, medicine, law, etc have this problem. What is it with the dysfunctional hiring BS in software development?

A surgeon with many experience at a top hospital most certainly does not get grilled on organic chemistry trivia from their undergrad classes when chaning jobs.

[fallingknife]

There seems to be a class of engineer here on HN that is offended by being asked to demonstrate their competence.

[vsareto]

I mean, if I ask each of the engineers at a company I'm about to join to do a live coding test, they'll just tell me to go away.

The reason I would ask this because I don't want to join a team that writes bad code.

They would tell me that each engineer did the same test and passed.

I would then say, "I don't believe you, I demand a live exercise so you can't cheat and help each other out". After all, their skills could have deteriorated since they joined!

People are only offended because companies don't believe our past demonstrations of competence.

[fallingknife]

You get to see their standards when you interview with them. You are free to decline their offer if you feel that the bar was too low, and maybe their engineers write bad code. On the other hand, they do not know the standards of the company you came from.

[mrexroad]

In 20+ years, I have rarely seen a technical interview actually be indicative of a team’s standards. I’ve seen good, bad, and much in between, but mostly I’ve found the “standards” communicated during the interview to be purely aspirational at best.

[throwaway2037]

Both. Barack Obama calls this a "false choice". There isn't a single best signal. Both have positives. Ideally, you want a candidate with both.

[artificial]

A never ending high pressure gauntlet, of course! The dream of dreams!