After applying, I was quickly sent a link to book a time slot for a live coding exercise, even before speaking to anyone. The live coding exercise was with two software engineers. You're given a straightforward problem to solve, followed by some tests that they ask you to run.

It was a strange experience. We said hello and our names, and then got straight into it. I found the two software engineers very quiet. One barely said anything other than hello and goodbye. The other offered a tip of logging something. I managed to solve the problem and had some time for questions before it finished. When I asked questions at the end of the interview, I got the impression the interviewers already knew they were going to say no, based on the way they answered.

A few days later, I received an email stating I didn't advance in the process, and nothing more, with no reasons given. In hindsight, I suspect it's because I started coding (writing the function definition only) before I came up with how I was going to solve it. I did this to help get my head around the problem under pressure. But who knows, as they didn't offer any reasons.

I found the whole process to be quick and efficient, but very transactional. Perhaps this is because they receive many applications, but it's very "their way or no way." They rejected a candidate possibly because they touched code before solving the problem first, but I'd be surprised if they didn't do the same.

What are some improvements you could make to this?