The myth of the developer that can't code
This article is full of opinions, and brings no facts to the table. The author does not mention his experience interviewing or hiring people, and the whole piece reads more like a rant.<p>&gt; When an accountant is in an interview, they&#x27;re not asked to multiply on-the-spot in their head what 485 x 761 equals because &quot;you have to be good at math to be an accountant&quot;<p>This is an ignorant statement. Accountats don&#x27;t have to multiply things in their head day to day. Yet developers do need to code, day to day.<p>I&#x27;m a hiring manager and the reason people code on interviews is - well, after joining a company, the first few months they _will_ spend a good chunk of their time coding. And the companies I worked at, who dropped the coding interview always regretted it, through mishires. People who could code, but were not very good at it. E.g. their code was sloppy, incorrect and they needed considerable mentoring and coaching to write code that worked. As senior developers.<p>The other reason is to even the odds. 70% of people I&#x27;ve seen hired did not have public Github profiles or code they could show. The people who complain about &quot;why can&#x27;t they just look at my portfolio&quot; and (potentially rightfully) conclude that they&#x27;re amazing developers don&#x27;t realize that this approach would result in more bias for hiring this group of people. Good luck maintaining a fair hiring bar this way or hire diverse candidates.<p>This is why the coding test exists in most places. It&#x27;s to test for something that you&#x27;re expected to do from day one and to even the bar that people need to jump through, for everyone.<p>I&#x27;d love to hear what OP suggests to replace the coding tests with - a chat about past projects, then make an offer? And what do you do with the people who don&#x27;t have these things to show?