The process began with a standard recruiter call, followed by a basic Java quiz that fortunately took only 10 minutes.

Next was an awkward technical phone screen without live coding. It consisted solely of Java trivia questions, and the interviewer repeatedly prompted me for the exact answers they had clearly scripted. They asked only one question about my last position. When I attempted to delve into technical details, the interviewer cut me off, presumably because I had already used the allotted time for that question. There was ample time at the end for questions, but I received only canned responses about how great Chewy is.

The onsite experience was merely adequate.

It started with a short interview with a manager to discuss the working style. This was followed by a whiteboarding session with an engineer. I proposed several implementations for the problem, discussing their pros and cons, but the interviewer seemed solely interested in the answer they already knew and didn't appear to fully grasp the alternative approaches. A third interview was primarily technical, focusing on my last position. It was a pleasant, albeit somewhat shallow, conversation. There were no system design questions.

Finally, I had a discussion with a director, who provided a more general overview of the company. This concluded with a brief office tour led by the recruiter.

Although the recruiter explicitly stated, "this is the end of the road for us," I was contacted a couple of days later for a live coding call. They explained they were unsure about my coding abilities. This situation highlights the flaws in their process, rendering the phone screen a waste of time and the onsite insufficient to reach a decision.

Despite losing all interest, I accepted the invitation for the live coding call. It involved only one classic question: finding all permutations for a given string. I began by stating the importance of input validation and deciding on the response for null inputs, but I would focus on the core problem first. I implemented a correct recursive solution. Afterward, the interviewer asked, "But what would happen if for instance we had a null input?" as if it were a significant gotcha.

Three days later, I received a rejection call with a vague reason. It appears their focus is heavily on Java trivia, but they lack a robust system for assessing fundamental coding skills.

Under what circumstances is a finally statement not executed in Java?