Reiterating my view, I feel like the interviewing grind has become akin to gymming - you go to your mental gym, build up your 'muscles' by doing pointless repetitive tasks AKA algorithms you'd never use in real life (probably like how bodybuilders would never need to deadlift 125kgs in their daily life). It doesn't directly help you do your job but you know bodybuilders have higher than average fitness levels. So in the same manner, devs grinding leetcode probably have higher 'fitness' levels (mostly a type of muscle memory for programming) than devs who don't.
But, if I'm a scout for a football team, I don't want to see you in the gym, I want to see you play football. Maybe, ideally, I'd like to see both, but seeing you play football is by far the more important thing.
So tons of open source contribution in relevant areas with quick high-quality, low-bug-count, beautiful code check-in and demonstrated knowledge in breaking down problems into sub-problems and come up with elegant algorithsm? (something you can see in the field?)
Some analogies make sense, some probably don't map well.
Google prefers to hire Devs with strong CS foundations because they assume these Devs can contribute in many areas.
If they were only to hire someone based off something that they've done before and excel only in that area, they'd be like other companies who only hire selectively based on specific skill-set (e.g.: Java Dev, or 3D/game devs).
No competent team makes decisions based solely on the Combine. It's a data point that gets combined with college game tape, private workouts, and some other special events like the Senior Bowl. Also, a significant number of players who end up getting drafted or signed as Undrafted Free Agents don't go to the Combine.
I didn't make that assertion. I was simply pointing out that the NFL has a set of skills tests that aren't football. Further, the effectiveness of the combine is as widely debated as the effectiveness of algorithm questions.
Except lifting weight has a DIRECT affect on increasing muscle mass. Doing pointless algorithms don't have any direct affect on your coding skills. I know plenty of college grads that can memorize all sorts of algorithms, but are shit at real world code. If I'm a company hiring to do REAL WORLD CODE, I'm going to ask questions pertaining to the position I'm willing to fill. The problem with these companies, is that they are hiring more than they need, therefore they aren't asking questions pertaining to any REAL job they're looking to fill.
It is also a form of “proof of work”. If you are willing to go to the lengths of learning these things, maybe you’ll be able to learn other things that are harder to assess during an interview.
