[fragmede]

That's just the problem though, isn't it? Because the leetcode format is known, unless the person tells you, how would you know they studied for months to pass it?

Brilliant person A does leetcode for a week to get the hang of the format, then interviews and gets a job offer. Person B who just isn't brilliant but is highly motivated, studies leetcode for months, interviews, and also gets the job.

You might have fantasies of outlawing "studying for months for the test" but be real. Person whos "is just not cut out to be a high level programmer, and should consider a career path more suited to their abilities", it turns out, is doing just fine with their career path having studied for the test.

I also think calendar time is the wrong way to measure it, since there's a huge difference between studied leetcode for 40 hours a week like it's your job or being in school; and studied leetcode for 4 hours on Friday nights instead of going out, for months.

[WalterBright]

I don't see the problem. If one studies leetcode for months, and passes the test, that's a pretty good sign he learned a lot about programming from it. How could he not learn by doing all this studying?

It's like saying someone cheated on a Calculus exam by studying Calculus.

> not cut out to be a high level programmer

I think that was misunderstood. I'll try again. If one studies for months and yet fails to learn the material, perhaps one is not suited to that field of endeavor. There are certain things others excel at that I would just fruitlessly beat my head into a wall trying. For example, anything involving hand-eye coordination or a musical instrument.

And so what? Sometimes people ask me what kind of career they should pursue, and I don't say "STEM". I advise draw a circle around things you're good at, and another circle around things that pay, and your career is in the intersection.