What are the most effective ways to evaluate a software developer's coding skills?

Most senior developers work on projects that they had to sign NDAs making it hard for them to showcase their work on their portfolio and repository. I will add that take home project should be an effective way of assessing a candidates coding practices, code optimisation, code readability and more

Regarding evaluating a software developer's coding skills, I believe portfolio review is essential. It's a straightforward method to gauge their abilities. A developer's portfolio, showcasing diverse projects, gives insights into their experience, interests, and strengths. Evaluating how they organize code, document work, and use various tools and frameworks is key. A strong portfolio includes a range of projects, detailed descriptions, and links to source code and live demos, offering a comprehensive view of their skillset.

It is rarely possible to determine programming skills from a candidate's portfolio, NDA's are used in almost all companies. However, if you have such a unique opportunity and time to do so, look closely at: 1. Project variety. Assess the range of projects. Diverse experiences indicate adaptability. 2. Code quality. Review code samples. Look for clean, efficient, and maintainable code. 3. Technological proficiency. Check the technologies used. Proficiency in relevant stacks is a positive sign. 4. Problem-solving. Analyze how challenges were approached and solved in projects. 5. Documentation. Evaluate the clarity of project documentation. Clear documentation reflects professionalism.

Reviewing the candidate's portfolio is part of your preparation as interviewer for the interview loops, but not enough in isolation. Interviewers are other engineers, they don't know everything. Investigate the areas of expertise of the candidate and raise a flag to the recruiting team if you don't think you could assess the candidate properly, specially if it's another job family (e.g. a software engineer assessing an Applied Scientist)

Evaluating a software developer's coding skills can be fairly straight forward. This can be done from the way a developer approaches a problem and how efficiently he is able to understand the problem at hand. Coding is last thing a developer needs to worry about. The first step is to getting an understanding of the problem and what use cases, exceptions, edge cases can be encountered while solving it. Next step would be how the developer plans to actually solve all of these aspects. Based on these points, one can easily evaluate the coding skills of a developer.

I am convinced that a coding challenge is the most accurate way to test coding skills quickly. These aspects are crucial for the coding challenge to be as productive as possible: 1. Coding challenge selection. Choose problems with well-structured and clear descriptions that match the complexity requirements of the role. 2. Time management. Assess how efficiently the candidate manages their time during the challenge. 3. Code structure. Evaluate the organization and structure of the candidate's code. 4. Algorithmic thinking. Examine the candidate's thinking skills and ability to devise efficient algorithms. 5. Error handling. Assess how well errors and edge cases are handled.

Coding challenge can reveal the mindset of a developer. It reveals: 1. Critical thinking ability 2. Problem solving ability 3. Ability to maintain code clean 4. Error handling skills 5. Ability to make code scalable code in terms of time and memory 6. Ability to describe his code ...And many more things. It could be considered one of the best technique to evaluate a developer's overall capabilities.

Using coding challenges is the best way to figure out if someone is good at programming. Instead of just looking at their resume, these challenges let people show how they can solve real problems using code. It's like a hands-on test that checks not only what they know but also how well they can use that knowledge to solve problems quickly. This way, companies can see if candidates are not only book-smart but also practical and creative in how they apply their coding skills. Coding challenges give a more accurate picture of whether someone can handle the real-world challenges of working in technology.

I will be the dark horse of the normal for coding challenges. "A good coding challenge should be relevant to the role". If this was true, then all Leetcode questions are not to be asked. While coding proficiency is absolutely important, I do not believe you can access a candidate's coding capabilities on non-real-world examples. A good coding challenge should access the candidate's critical thinking, problem solving, and creative solutions of what could work. The answer doesn't have to be correct as it's usually not in the real world when solving challenging technical specs. I don't believe in book memorization. Coding proficiency can be taught and improved. Certain soft skills cannot, this is where system design questions shine!

Candidates and interviewers often mistake the purpose of a coding challenge. The best outcome is not a perfect solution solved in silence, but an interview with a candidate explaining their thought process to navigate different solutions. As an interviewer, pay attention to: 1. Choose a challenge with multiple solutions. You don't want a perfectly solved problem without comparing with other solutions. 2. Avoid problems with tricks. If solving the problem efficiently requires finding a trick, you won't allow great candidates to show their signals. 3. Prepare your hints. Reduce the error of the candidate for being nervous or not arriving to the solution on their own

Here are five crucial aspects of the code review process to consider: 1. Security. Assess for vulnerabilities and ensure the code follows secure coding practices. 2. Problem-solving and design. Evaluate the effectiveness of the problem-solving approach, design choices, and overall architecture. 3. Testing and error handling. Check for thorough test coverage and robust error handling to enhance code reliability. 4. Maintainability. Evaluate compliance with coding standards, consistent indentation, and clear comments for easy maintenance. 5. Code quality. Ensure clean, readable code, minimize duplication, and assess modularity for overall code quality.

Present the candidate with a sample of code — either from their past projects or a piece relevant to your company's work. Focus on how they analyze and critique the code. Look for their ability to identify potential issues, suggest optimizations, and consider scalability and maintainability aspects. A good developer should demonstrate an understanding of coding standards and best practices. They should be able to articulate why certain coding choices were made and how they could be improved. Additionally, pay attention to how they handle feedback. A developer's response to criticism or suggestions is telling of their teamwork and collaboration skills.

Reviewing code helps to evaluate coders experience and maturity. The way developer code the program shows his thinking towards the problem and how much he understood from the problem statements. Mostly code review will show you whether coder coded by considering the multiple possibilities or just to make it work for now.

A code review exercise won't only give you technical signals, but behavioral signals. On technical signals, check if the candidate can think on their own for the solution to the problem or they are just going along with the proposed solution in the code review and addressing minor comments. Strong candidates will get further away from the proposed approach and question if it's the best. On behavioral signals, focus on the way they make the comments, the way the talk about the author. The code review is a process to build something with multiple members of the team involved, not a process of destroying the author's approach.

Code review helps to analyse thinking skills and coding experience of a candidate. We can ask about a piece of code from a candidate that can be related to an existing project and can be a sample code and then we can analyse the approach of the candidate to solve/optimize the problem.

I am convinced that in pair programming sessions, it is important to pay attention to these four aspects to identify a candidate's skills: 1. Problem-solving and adaptability: - Breakdown of complex problems. - Implementation of solutions. - Adaptability to changing requirements. - Considering alternative approaches. 2. Communication and collaboration: - Clear communication and explanation of thought processes. - Willingness to collaborate with a partner. 3. Code quality and design: - Clarity, consistency, and adherence to coding conventions. - Designing well-structured, modular, and maintainable code. 4. Testing and error handling - Thorough testing approach. - Proactive identification of potential errors.

Pair programming is a good way to assess if a coder can communicate well with others while potentially having their code being criticised live. You have a lot of coders out there that just can't take criticism and that's just no good.

Totally agreed that pair programming could be a way to judge a candidate. On hiring processes we can have pair programming rounds where candidate is given a problem and he pairs up with an employee or the interviewer and they together solve the problem where interviewer helps him with the hints and judges on aspects like software development architecture, language and development skills.

Pair programming is two developers helping one another get something done. Usually one drives the keyboard while the other does most of the talking, or vice-versa. I've also paired where one write the code and one writes the test, which can be fun and productive. However, since pairing is mutually beneficial and interviewing is adversarial, pairing should NEVER be used in the interview context. If it is used, it's being used disingenuously, kind of like when a recruiter asked me to explain three software engineering concepts, and one of them was make-believe!

Pair programming is indeed a valuable method to assess a software developer's coding skills. Collaborating in real-time with another developer allows for immediate observation of coding proficiency, problem-solving abilities, and communication skills. It provides insights into the developer's coding style, approach to challenges, and how effectively they collaborate within a team. Pair programming is a practical and interactive way to evaluate and enhance coding skills.

The least effective way to determine a candidate's coding skills, but this method can show other essential strengths of the candidate, such as: 1. Communication skills. Evaluate how effectively the candidate communicates and describes technical concepts. 2. Teamwork and collaboration. Assess experience working in and contributing to a team. 3. Problem-solving approach. Understand the candidate's approach to overcoming challenges. 4. Adaptability. Measure how well the candidate handles changes and unexpected circumstances. 5. Passion for learning. Assess commitment to continuous learning and improvement.

You can get signals on the behavioral and coding abilities of the candidates through technical questions. Yet, most companies have specific loops for behavioral interviews. This interviews assess that the resume didn't lie. They assess the seniority of the candidate based on their answers. As an interviewer, for each question get a rubric for the kind of answers the candidate gives. To remove bias, you can't rely on how much you like the candidate. Evaluate the answer with a rubric to justify your decision. As a candidate, prepare them. You won't come up with an answer in the moment. You want to be efficient on transmitting the signals in a clear and concise way.

Behavioral rounds provide insight into a candidate's soft skills, like communication and teamwork. I notice adaptability, problem-solving approach, and interpersonal skills. It helps gauge cultural fit and how well they align with the team's dynamics.

I find these interview questions (and answers!) to be insipid and rather useless. Being able to wax poetic about your experience doesn't mean you'll make a good teammate who can execute.

Behavioral Interview helps to analyse the thinking skills of a candidate. We can give a situation and ask about a solution or approach to handle that from a candidate. We can use STAR (Situation, Task, Action and Result) approach.

How flexible the developer is to work on multiple projects or to switch one language to another and whether he is okay with learning new technologies along with the existing one.

Both technical and behavioral are necessary, but not enough in isolation. A candidate good on behavioral skill without technical skills will remain unproductive for a long time until ramped up. A strong technical candidate with bad behavioral skills will introduce problems in the team and require coaching and close monitoring. Not all candidates are a culture-match, and that's fine. Not all candidates are technically proficient for this level at this stage of their career. And that's also fine

The most effective way to evaluate a software developer's coding skills is through a combination of methods. Begin with a portfolio review to assess past work, followed by a coding challenge to evaluate problem-solving abilities. Conduct a code review for coding standards and readability. Pair programming provides insights into real-time collaboration, and a behavioral interview assesses soft skills. Additionally, consider algorithmic proficiency, testing skills, version control familiarity, documentation quality, and commitment to continuous learning for a comprehensive evaluation.

The most effective ways to evaluate a software developer's coding skills. Is through their Knowledge Behavior Problem Solving By knowledge, I don't mean you need to learn all things. But you should have enough knowledge of things you learned. That you know what's happening. Behavior, because who wouldn't want a firm and reliable behavior? And by problem solving, I don't mean just leetcode or coding challenges. I mean any problem if possible.

When a software modification is needed that involves his code, whoever does the mod could testify to how easy or hard it was to understand and change his code.