In the first interview, I was asked to solve a few coding challenges with optimal approaches in terms of time and space. It consisted of a question that expected some twists using arrays, and another question that expected the use of a tree. I answered both and was selected for the second round of the interview.

In the second round, the interviewer gave me a coding problem and asked me to solve it. I answered it using heaps. She told me she was expecting a more optimal approach. In the end, I asked her what could be a better approach than using heaps, and she answered by saying to use a 'Priority Queue'.

I was pretty much shocked to understand that the interviewer didn't know that both are the same. 'Priority Queues are nothing but using heaps. There's nothing else.' I explained to her that a priority queue is just one fancy name for what I had already implemented.

She asked me another question, to which I answered using graphs, and she was convinced here. I also noticed her leaving the interview session and rejoining after some time after my second question.

The interview is done, and I did not get the position.

PS: I gave optimal solutions to both problems asked, and I wasn't asked any other questions. The only issue here is the lack of knowledge of the interviewer!

The interviewer asked me to solve a coding problem.