Comment on the key moments of an interview, in the report and the replay
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Nessuno ha ancora preso questa issue.
Valutazione
- Difficoltà
- 4/5
- Tempo stimato
- 3-5 giorni
- Idoneità per principianti
- 45/100
- Tipo di issue
- Funzionalità
- Chiarezza
- Abbastanza chiara
- Stato di attività
- Attiva
- Stack tecnologico
- rust
- Ambito
- backend-api-design, full-stack
Direzione di ricerca
Start from where phase judgments are produced and grounded by quote_is_grounded, then from where the report is assembled from the in-memory session, since the moment rules (hint requested, failed-then-passed test run, long response window, first REACTO/STAR step, large rewrite) must read recorded session events. Then trace the replay page's existing "Moments" list to attach notes to matching entries, using event occurrence times rather than evidence-recording times (see #169). Done means a capped "Key moments" section renders with quotes verified against the session, ungrounded notes dropped, scores unchanged, and replay links only when a recording exists.
Scritto dal modello di indicizzazione a partire dal testo della issue.
Descrizione
Who is affected
Candidates reviewing an interview afterwards. The report says what went well and what to improve, but in general terms ("relied on hints", "could have planned the dictionary update after the lookup"). It does not say where in the interview each of those happened. The replay page lists every editor snapshot, test run and response window under "Moments", but leaves the candidate to work out which ones matter and why.
Desired outcome
A handful of moments, picked from what the session recorded, each with one or two sentences of coaching tied to its time. They appear in the report as a "Key moments" section, and in the replay as notes on the matching entries under "Moments", so the candidate can open the moment and see the code and transcript as they were.
An example from one of my local test interviews, on Chargeback Pair Match:
- 04:40, tests failed on
[3,2,4], 6. You read the failing case, saw that 3 had matched itself, and moved the insert after the lookup. Next time, list the case where the target is twice one amount before writing the loop, and the bug never appears.
Proposed shape
- The platform picks the moments, by rule. The session already records the events that make a moment worth a note, so a model does not need to search for them: a hint requested (given, or withheld), a test run that failed and a later one that passed, a long response window, the first time each REACTO or STAR step was recorded, and a large rewrite of the code. A cap, for example at most six, keeps the list short.
- The report model writes the notes, grounded the way the phase judge is. Each note must quote the candidate's words or the code from that moment, and the server keeps a note only when the quote is found there, as
quote_is_groundeddoes for phase judgments. A note with no grounded quote is dropped, not shown with a warning. Notes coach; they do not score, and they change nothing in the report's scores. - The times come from when the event happened, not from when its evidence was recorded, so the notes do not repeat #169.
- It works without recording. The report is written from the session in memory, so the "Key moments" section does not need recording to be provisioned. The links into the replay appear only when a recording exists.
Later, and optional: a highlight video
With the moments and their notes in hand, a short video could walk through them: the code at each moment, the transcript as captions, and the note as narration. HyperFrames renders HTML compositions to video and would suit this. It needs Node.js, a headless Chrome and FFmpeg, which the runtime deliberately does without, so it belongs in an offline script that reads a downloaded report or replay, not in the server. It should use only the code, the board and the transcript, never the camera.
Open questions
- Should the moment rules be fixed, or depend on the interview loop (coding only, coding plus behavioral, whiteboard)?
- Does the note pass belong in the report call, or in a separate call after it? A separate call adds latency but keeps the report schema unchanged.
- How many moments are useful before the list becomes another wall of text?
Related: #169 (evidence timestamps), #242 (a review aimed at learning).
- Lingua principale
- Rust
- Stelle
- 144
- Fork
- 41
- Merge medio
- 1g 9h
- PR unite (30g)
- 95
Preparare l'ambiente
- Nessun Dockerfile né file Docker Compose
- Nessun modello di pull request
- Leggi la guida per i contributori
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di sysprog21/codetrial
-
Progress difficulty filter lists Hard before MediumForse già presa @Pandamachi l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 86/100
sysprog21/codetrial#281 · 1 commento ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Highlight the active line in the code editorForse già presa @ArthurArthurArthur0817 l’ha presa 4 giorni fa. Aperta
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
sysprog21/codetrial#247 · 2 commenti · 1 assegnatario ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Visualize attempt score trends in the progress viewForse già presa @onepch l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
sysprog21/codetrial#275 · 1 assegnatario ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Whiteboard pen swatches are named by hex code and do not expose which one is selectedForse già presa @LeafYeh1 l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
sysprog21/codetrial#274 · 1 commento · 1 assegnatario ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Toggle line comments in the code editor with Ctrl+/Forse già presa @henrylee1003 l’ha presa oggi. Aperta
sysprog21/codetrial#273 · 1 assegnatario ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
Tutte le issue di sysprog21/codetrial
Issue simili
-
llm translation
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 76/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
area: backend type: enhancement
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 61/100
armadavalor/WinKnife#6 ·
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 68/100
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
5omeOtherGuy/phaseone#870 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Write a support policyAperta
Difficoltà 1/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 72/100
MattA-Official/vwmcp#20 ·