No that's not true, the vast majority of companies/positions do not do this.
Most companies that pay very well and are competitive do it, and the reason is because we get so many crappy applicants that it remains to this day the least risky, cost effective way to filter out bad developers.
Sorry but there’s a lot of ways to filter devs, you would need to back this up with data.
Here’s another avenue, show me your OSS work if you have it. That give me a far better picture of how you develop than LC ever could. Don’t have OSS, then a take home test also works perfectly fine or a programming exercise that’s realistic
There are not many that are as cost effective and scalable for the number of applicants that a tech company can get.
> Here’s another avenue, show me your OSS work if you have it.
For the complaining elsewhere in this thread about how leetcode filters for people who have free time to work on it and thus selects for upper middle class... this is even worse in that regard. Furthermore, the contributions of a new grad are... often "poor".
The take-home test is similarly derided in many circles that refuse to do leetcode and the "write this program" is even less transferable to doing interviews at other companies.
With OSS you're at least coming out with a product that is useful to the ecosystem and you can show off for the rest of your career. It'll take you about as long as the LC nonsense does.
I've also worked for companies worth billions of dollars that had tons of really smart engineers and didn't do LC. Its a cargo cult at this point, plain and simple. Google made it cool, now other people have jumped on, not because they have data but because they want to be like Google
Most companies that pay very well and are competitive do it, and the reason is because we get so many crappy applicants that it remains to this day the least risky, cost effective way to filter out bad developers.