LC hard with progression

Apr 22, 2019 5 Comments

There are some LC hards that have a naive implementation that’s easy to whiteboard and tedious to implement, and a really clever implementation that presupposes that you have seen that kind of problem before.

Do you just do the clever one to leave time for discussing complexity, or derive it by showing the naive algo?

As an interviewer myself, if the candidate comes up with something super clever in the first 5 minutes without any hints, I’ll assume they’ve seen this problem before. 💁‍♂️

Google Meta Amazon
5

comments

Want to comment? LOG IN or SIGN UP
  1. TOP
  2. RECENT
  3. OLD
 TOP 5 Comments
  • Google / Eng
    El Dappo

    Go to company page Google Eng

     El Dappo
    Derive your own solutions. Don't forget the purpose of the interview; signals!

    I don't give a shit if someone vomits the optimized solution in a few minutes. I would like the majority of my notes to be how the candidate think vs what they know.
    May 4, 2019 1
  • Why even ask hards if you already realize that they can be gimmicky enough to warrant someone memorizing their solutions?
    Apr 22, 2019 1
    • OP
      Fair enough. I actually tend to ask questions that relate more to on the job work, but also throw in a harder question to see how a candidate makes good guesstimates or applies data structures. By no means do I expect them to get a fully working optimal solution in 45 min.

      However, idk if that’s how big company interviewers see it. As a candidate, am I penalized for suboptimal fully working solutions?
      Apr 22, 2019