I am puzzled by how she first lists CS books, including books on algorithms, and says that she's read most of them — and then says how she is having problems wi

I am puzzled by how she first lists CS books, including books on algorithms, and says that she's read most of them — and then says how she is having problems with writing a function where she would apply her algorithmic thinking; or with talking through the complexity of a certain algorithm. Does this suggest that "reading" a book is not enough; that the concepts from the book have not been quite internalized, etc.? How else would you explain such a discrepancy? Because saying I've read a book is subjective self-assessment; while being able to apply the concepts from a book, or discuss them with others, is a more objective assessment? Not that I am judging. I don't know most of what she says she does. I don't read PhD papers, or math textbooks. I am probably a much worse programmer than her. I am just puzzled by what she is describing.