Not gp, but obviously yes. I'm yet to meet someone who can pass a leetcode-style interview with sober and conscious interviewers, but can't code. Have you?
Leetcode and coding ability is an A -> B but B -/-> A situation: failing leetcode doesn't mean you can't program, but the reverse is absolutely the case.
Leetcode can't filter out other potential issues that may impact success (e.g. poor anger management, or poor judgement).
I'm yet to meet someone who can pass LC, but can't code.
I should perhaps be clear that by "overwhelming proof of ability" I meant "the ability to program well". Which by definition does intersect with one's capacity for judgement, on a certain level. (Though is largely orthogonal to other behavioral issues, I find).
I see LC as providing proof of, at best, minimal ability. And I've seen plenty of people who can run circles around LC-style tasks, but when it gets to the bigger picture -- you know, writing good, maintainable software -- somehow, it just never comes together right.
We agree that obtaining proof of minimal ability is important. I just think that proof can be obtained in other, far less mutually degrading (and error-prone) ways.
Leetcode and coding ability is an A -> B but B -/-> A situation: failing leetcode doesn't mean you can't program, but the reverse is absolutely the case.
Leetcode can't filter out other potential issues that may impact success (e.g. poor anger management, or poor judgement).