“But didn't you write an embedded OS?”
I hate the Cracking the Coding Interview&#x2F;Leetcode style... studying for these type of interviews is annoying. Trying to find a good video on youtube, where they aren&#x27;t just naively coding up the bruteForce-&gt;optimal possible solutions, especially is irritating. It is literally a landscape of college kids with thousands of viewers who treat these interviews like a standardized test (SAT, GMAT). Even the author of the book produces videos with very little insight or meaningful content.<p>&quot;Find all the subsets in a set that add up to sum&quot; -- &quot;Okay for this we will use the sliding window technique and here is how it is done&quot; -- WTF is this. I get that they want to see problem-solving skills, but this is on a different level requiring the interviewee to have studied and knowledge of the technique, otherwise we are basically trying to develop efficient algorithms from scratch and in little time. --This makes sense for college interviewees who have only studied the past 4 years, but for a professional with experience, why is this adequate??<p>Does algorithmic programming matter?-- still yes. But the way it is interviewed is absurd and inadequate. I had a production service centered around the stable-roommate-problem. It took me a week or two (mostly research) to develop something out and fit it into our codebase. It then took 1-3 more weeks to actually make it work for us and cover edge cases (i.e. Irving&#x27;s algo quits after instability -- this isnt an option in the real-world). I read much material on the subject, other&#x27;s code, had many deep-thinking sessions where I was mostly in my head, wrote unreadable scratch on paper, collab-whiteboarded (sometimes arguing), tested&amp;failed PoCs, and had many breaks in-between it all. How successful was that project?--very, did I need to know and study techniques with lacking&#x2F;meaningless basis to do it--no.