[fapjacks]

Maybe if you give the candidate four hours. But in the hour or so that is ubiquitous among individual interviews (even if repeated four or five times with different interviewers), you aren't going to be any meaningful information out of anything the interviewee will have time to code. An hour is enough time to write something trivial. Anything that really pushes a developer's skills is going to need a big part of that hour just for them to put pen to paper for design. The best interviews I ever had involved a week-long spare-time development project at my own pace. Those are the only interviews I ever was able to really show what I'm capable of. Incidentally, my interview at the Googleplex I thought was worthless.

[eru]

Interesting. They'd need to pay me quite a lot of money for a weeks worth of effort.

[fapjacks]

Well, I would say the total tasks were tasks taking about a handful of hours, but the deadlines were about a week out from when they were given. So essentially, they were spreading the "normal" five or six hours worth of interviewing with developers and doing trivial tasks (that I think don't really show the interviewer what kind of programmer I am), but compressed into one project, meanwhile time-wise spread out across a week. I've interviewed maybe five times like this (most recently twice last year). Definitely I felt like the code they got was a good representation of the kind of code I write normally. I would never agree to working for a week for a job interview without pay. Though most recently I had an interview where the guys didn't even ask for my resume once. They only ever looked over my Github, which for me was a nice touch, and made me feel like those guys know wtf they're doing. I should mention here that I interview for fun continually, otherwise I would have taken the one the guys offered who didn't even ask for my resume.