The first-round recruiter called me and asked standard questions. We spoke about the so-called "Culture Memo." I was pretty impressed with their honesty.

The second round was with the director, who asked me a few questions about my current experience and described the current role, etc. Then, I was given a take-home assignment.

I completed the assignment but was not totally happy with some parts of the code. However, since I had committed to a date, I submitted the assignment.

What was funny was the feedback I received. I was told that the code did not compile and had missing dependencies. This is funny because it definitely compiled, and there was no way the code could compile without the dependencies. It also stated that the tests should have captured these bugs – seriously, tests should have captured compilation errors? (which did not exist in the first place).

I doubt the caliber of the directors who are testing or evaluating the candidates. If they wanted to reject me, why give such a frivolous reason?

I was scheduled to have a code review, and the director sent me an email a couple of hours before the meeting, saying they had decided not to move on.

Design a tool to evaluate GitHub stars, forks, etc.