When learning on my own, I I prefer to learn things that will last decades rather than years or months. Examples: Linux (bash, core utils, containers), CS (algorithms, data structures), compilers, other paradigms (functional, logic, oop), hardware architecture (logic gates, cpu design, assembly), encryption algos, Vim, etc.

Stuff that I think will only last a few years I will learn as needed on the job or at least on the clock.

You will lose the best candidates with an onerous coding challenge.

Our process, which has been heavily influenced by debate on r/experiencedevs on reddit involves a short phone screen, a 30 MINUTE coding challenge, a tech interview consisting of pair programming, and a non-tech interview with management. Very light.

The coding challenge is a FILTER only. It’s not to evaluate who to hire, but instead it’s to filter who not to continue interviewing.

You learn a lot during pair programming in a short period of time, including personality and team fit. We let them drive and we just watch and discuss. The assignment is to fix a bug, and refactor the code the caused the bug.

I wouldn’t consider the bugs chatgpt’s fault, per se. The same could happen by blindly copy/pasting from SO or a template Github project. If you are copy/pasting from anywhere, it’s even more important that you have good automated tests with good coverage, and that you take extra time to understand what you pasted.

One of the things I do is generate high level tests first, and then the implementation code. This way I know it works, and I can spend extra time reviewing the test code first to make sure it has the correct goal(s).

Learning is another matter. Personally, ChatGPT has greatly accelerated my learning of libraries and other languages. I’ve also used it to help me grok a block of complex code, and to automatically comment and refactor complex code into something more understandable. But it can also be used as a crutch.

Tbh, I hate both. I wish git recognized an attempt to sync with a parent branch without resulting in either altered history (rebase) or a difficult to view log graph (merge). I also hate that teams have to choose one or the other.

It would be nice if all git graph UIs could easily exclude parent branch merges (with a checkbox). I wrote a shell script that did that, but not everyone used it of course.

I rebase with parent branch until I create a PR. Hopefully, I’ll get reviews quickly and won’t have to sync with the parent branch before merging the PR into the parent. However, if the PR lives longer than I’d like and conflicts occur, I’ll merge from the parent branch into the local feature branch.

Zero downtime deployments can get very complex for heavy usage apps, such as blue-green deployment.

We decided to avoid the complexity with some practical workarounds.

• Most deployments happen at 4am. “develop” branch merges deploy at 4am, and “master” branch merges deploy immediately.
• We force browser refresh if the front end detects the back end has had breaking changes. We attempt to re-populate form field values.
• During database migrations, we send 503 with Retry-After header in response to POSTs. Our client code knows to wait for that time and try again. If the time is too long, the user gets a friendly message that it will try again in X seconds. GETs are handled by an available read-replica, if possible.