Phone Screen:

They followed the usual collabedit.com based shared document to write code for the given question.

The interviewer was nice and had good communication skills. I bombed the interview, possibly due to the prompts required to answer the question. Their expectations are higher.

No sour grapes here; the process is fair, better than other companies. With this out of the way, here is some feedback to LI itself:

One important point I realized was the fact that any line you type on the screen is considered final. My thought process is to exercise my own code and find issues with it. The interviewer was immediately jumping in, pointing out things. Holes in the logic should be fine to point out, but leave a minute or two to let the person think. It is a tough (only for some people, obviously) thing to pull off a balance between showing the interviewer what you are thinking versus solving the problem itself.

I feel that an experienced engineer can't simply survive a day not knowing some of the things the interviewer mentioned in my interview. I write decent C++ code day in and day out, which is reviewed to a very high standard.

So, rejection from LI was a damning indictment of my "coding skills." So, be prepared to feel like the worst engineer on the planet for a good month or so if you do get rejected.

It is a famous problem from a famous book that I happened to read over 12 years ago.

Not entirely unexpected, but writing the code on the screen was a different challenge by itself.