There were three rounds:

One with a recruiter who initially contacted me (he was actually great and diligent).

One with some senior developers who asked technical questions.

If you get by that, you have a two-hour assessment with more developers: one hour coding on HackerRank and another hour of technical questions again.

Two hours of technical questions is a bit much. I'm not a fan of these types of interviews. I am not a dictionary, and any developer knows we often use Google for things. It's a frustrating interview process. I provide ample work within my portfolio and I'm more of a do-er than someone who memorizes every fancy technical term thrown my way. My work speaks for itself, not my ability to memorize monotonous catchphrases.

The coding assessment was also awful. The first question was a simple "find the sum of numbers in an array." Very real-world.

Then there was a Fibonacci problem (I don't have a typical CS background and never bothered with algorithms like this, since it's rarely used in the real world for most web developers).

The third was calculating the area of a triangle based on coordinates (again, I haven't touched geometry since high school).

And the final was two arrays and picking the max shares you can buy given your set limit (more real-world-ish).

All in all, I'm not a fan of this type of interview process. Evaluate my past work, or have me work on something a little bit more relevant to what people do day in and day out as a web developer.

What is everything and anything under the moon?