← Back to experiences
[ OK ] Loaded —
[ INFO ]
$ cd
$ ls -lt
01
02
03
04
05
$ ls -lt
01
02
03
04
05
user@intervues:~/experiences/…$
Level: Junior-Level
Round: Onsite · Type: Multiple Types · Difficulty: 6/10 · Duration: 240 min · Interviewer: Unfriendly
Topics: Binary Tree, Hash Table, Heap, Intervals
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Interview date: 2026-01-29
Question: Coding round focusing on a binary tree problem.
Question: Standard behavioral questions.
Question: A second coding round focusing on a hash table problem.
Question: Onsite coding rounds focusing on heap and interval problems.
I had a total of four coding rounds. None of the problems were directly from online problem sets. The topics covered in the interview rounds were binary trees, hash tables, heaps, and intervals.
I think communication with the interviewer is more important than providing a perfect solution. The reason for my additional coding round in R1 was because I provided an unexpected solution to the interviewer in the first coding round. We spent more time discussing the feasibility of this solution, leaving no time for follow-up questions.
In the additional round, I didn't provide the optimal solution and had some hiccups along the way. However, I actively communicated my thought process and explained my ideas. After the round, I felt dejected, thinking I would fail, but fortunately, I received an invitation to R2 a few days later.
During the interview process, I constantly checked if the interviewer was following my train of thought, making sure their silence was due to contemplation rather than confusion.
In many cases, interviewers are more concerned with how you think rather than if you can provide the optimal solution in the first minute. (However, this also depends on the interviewer.)