Code assignments

I'm a software engineer and while there are many out there who are better -- my skills are decent enough. When software engineers apply to jobs its common to be asked to do a "code assignment." This is where the company will give you some (basic) task, you'll write a solution, and based on some (undefined) standard they will advance you to the next stage. I've often seen discussions about take home code assignments online with people asking "what reasons can I give to refuse doing them." Here are my thoughts on that.

Code assignments are a red flag for shit-tier companies

Whenever I've had good offers it required no convincing on my behalf. Do you know why? Because they immediately recognized the quality of my existing work and its relevance to their problem. It was never a question of "is this person the right fit for the job" because they had the answer to that question right in front of them. But this was only possible because they bothered to do the bare minimum to see what I was all about. Shit-tier companies won't even do that (remarkably, they think they'll get good candidates.)

Guaranteed to be a waste of time

Every code assignment I've ever done has been a waste of time. Every. Single. One. Either I was ghosted; Or it was judged as not being "good enough"; Often the assignment turned out to take prohibitively more effort than advertised. So now I don't even bother. Now let me ask you this: what kind of cuck sits there for hours doing an unpaid assignment even when the most statistically likely outcome is a generic rejection email? More-so, do they realize that doing this shit over and over creates a chilling effect where it becomes an expectation for everyone to do this stupid bullshit?

It shows a lack of respect

You go to hire a welder. Do you ask them to demonstrate every possible weld before you hire them? You go to hire an accountant. Do you ask them to balance a sample check book before you hire them? You go to consult a doctor. Do you make them do sample clinical interviews of a model patient before you let them treat you. You go to hire a carpenter. Do you ask them to build a small project tree house, first? You go to hire a software engineer. "Here's a list of convoluted technical bullshit. Stand at the white board and prove you can do it." Man, fuck these people. Why is your existing portfolio and references not good enough? Why is a 4 year degree not good enough?

Assignments are standardized

Most code assignments are designed to be standardized. This means that rather than having an open problem like "design a kewl web app" it will be something like "given this binary tree, add up the left side." The reason for this is often the recruiters handing out these coding assignments like poisoned candy can't code themselves. So they want to know "what answer is right" beforehand. A black and white question might filter people who can't code. But I've still got to wonder why a persons past experience in programming roles couldn't also do that? And why a portfolio of original works wouldn't be a better signal? Since its much harder to fake genuine creativity, passion, innovation, and technical skills.

PS: why are recruiters who cant code using this to assess if people can code? Does this not seem like a bad idea?

Tl; dr: show them your portfolio. If they don't get it then you're not the right fit. If you have no portfolio you should provide references.