4 ms·

A lot of people would disagree with #4. There's nothing wrong with saying the naive algorithm and then refining it to the correct algorithm. I got the O(nlog n)

A lot of people would disagree with #4. There's nothing wrong with saying the naive algorithm and then refining it to the correct algorithm. I got the O(nlog n) algorithm for the longest increasing subsequence problem, but it wasn't the first algorithm I came up with. Also, asking about capitalization in the reversed words problem seems stupid to me -- I'm not really sure why the case would change, and if the interviewer has random addenda to the problem they should state them up front. FYI, I just completed the Microsoft internship interview.

sabat 17y ago
The unwitting arrogance displayed by this guy and many others charged with interviewing in today's climate is often astounding. Here, jump through this random hoop -- and you'd better be ready for this hoop, too! I'm sure it makes them feel quite good about themselves for being fortunate enough to be on the right side of the interview table. I look forward to the next boom, when they will be begging smart people to take jobs. They probably won't get them.
- gridspy 17y ago
  On my second interview at a past role I was asked to create a solution to a simple problem. I thought that what was wanted was something easily extensible. You can imagine my frustration at the third inverview when I discovered that I was expected to be playing code golf. Jumping through stupid, invisible hoops is a waste of everyone's time.
- tpearson 17y ago
  I think in many cases "random hoops" are useful in interviews - they show that you can modify your solution to accomodate unforeseen problems, and make sure you know the full scope of the problem (by asking questions about it) before jumping in with a solution.
  - sabat 17y ago
    If the actual job involved solving random problems in an instant, then these tests would make sense. As they are, they're really just statements of power: I have a job, you want a job, so I can make you jump through this hoop. I am great! Look at my little fiefdom.

sabat 17y ago

The unwitting arrogance displayed by this guy and many others charged with interviewing in today's climate is often astounding. Here, jump through this random hoop -- and you'd better be ready for this hoop, too! I'm sure it makes them feel quite good about themselves for being fortunate enough to be on the right side of the interview table. I look forward to the next boom, when they will be begging smart people to take jobs. They probably won't get them.

gridspy 17y ago
On my second interview at a past role I was asked to create a solution to a simple problem. I thought that what was wanted was something easily extensible. You can imagine my frustration at the third inverview when I discovered that I was expected to be playing code golf. Jumping through stupid, invisible hoops is a waste of everyone's time.
tpearson 17y ago
I think in many cases "random hoops" are useful in interviews - they show that you can modify your solution to accomodate unforeseen problems, and make sure you know the full scope of the problem (by asking questions about it) before jumping in with a solution.
- sabat 17y ago
  If the actual job involved solving random problems in an instant, then these tests would make sense. As they are, they're really just statements of power: I have a job, you want a job, so I can make you jump through this hoop. I am great! Look at my little fiefdom.