- Personal time taken that is not relevant to the job?
>> Also, it is "Green Lumber fallacy" to think that a knowledge of "how webpack 1, 2, 3, 4, and nth build system in JavaScript here works" will make you a better engineer. Those kinds of knowledge aren't long lasting, and it is also quite easy to learn relative to DS&A.
- Being able to demonstrate that you know how A build system works, and the details enough to show you've had to actually solve issues with it, may not be long lasting, but it does show you learn your tools.
>> I don't understand why people prefer "here take home questions/work for 5 hours for free" over DS&A interview.
- Awfully presumptive to assume they should be unpaid. I'd also take an unpaid, but interesting and novel engineering problem, over the unpaid hours of grinding leetcode that is considered interview prep.
>> Here is the problem with these kinds of articles. Majority of them are written by people who hate these kinds of interview questions, and by extension, they probably aren't that good at it.
- I'm a hiring manager and I hate them, from both sides of the interview table, because it tells me nothing about the candidate that I want to know. I've done them, I've both passed and failed them (entirely dependent on the question, my frame of mind at the time, if it's one I've done before or where I can easily come up with the 'clever' solution, etc); I also recognize they're measuring a very specific thing (your willingness to do bullshit prep work), that isn't job related.
I'll also add, the same arguments in favor of DS&A algorithms apply to those lateral thinking brain teasers that no one uses any more, the "how many manhole covers are there in NYC" style of thing.