It was insane and disappointing.

I told the panel that I am from Python, and I was assured that it doesn't matter unless I lack the methodologies.

I still don't understand how such a company would ask people about the syntax of a language rather than look for problem-solving skills (in pseudocode).

Round 1 was an aptitude/algorithm/Java assessment (I applied as a Pythonista). I answered the questions on Java (from past experience with the language) and cleared it.

Round 2:

This interviewer's English was horrible. (I even hinted that I know Hindi/Telugu).

• Questions on JRE/JDK (He told me these are basics that everyone on Earth is expected to know).
• The regular reversing a number.

I lost the interest in answering any more questions. I wanted to leave right away but stayed just to gain the experience.

• The 25 horses problem (it took me four times to ask him what he meant by "horses"). He didn't understand my analysis, and when I came home, I was shocked to see what he was trying to do (literally getting me to answer the question in his way, the way it is online).
• Stock-market profit maximization: He tried to write random numbers (stock values) but then erased them all and took out his phone to copy the values from somewhere. (It took me 10 minutes to understand what I should do with the numbers he gave me. He tried very hard, with me asking him to repeat every other word).

Isn't the goal of asking such questions to look for my approach to a problem rather than the right solution already posted online?

It is not always the case that the interviewee should be appealing; the interviewer should be interesting as well to continue a conversation further.

1. Many questions on JDK and JRE. (Would a program run without a JDK but with a JRE in the system?)

2. Programs on access specifiers and Java.