Two guys took my interview. It was very strange and shameful that they didn't know anything.

For example, one guy was asking me, "The job of a copy constructor can be done using a normal constructor as well. Then why do we need a copy constructor?"

Why we need a copy constructor is a very good question. But it's very shameful that he seemed to have more than 7-8 years of experience and he was telling me that a copy constructor's job could be done using a normal constructor as well.

Now coming to the second guy. While explaining something, I said, "No matter whether you create an object using new or not, the memory will be allocated at runtime."

Then he started arguing with me, "How will a static object's memory be allocated at runtime? You are wrong. It should be at compile time."

Then I said, "No, you are wrong. If it is a static object, then the memory decision will happen at compile time, but allocation will happen at runtime after the process is loaded into RAM by the loader."

That's how too much argument happened with these two low-IQ folks. And then finally, they rejected me.

BTW, I don't want to reduce my existing IQ by working under such low-IQ folks.

Normal C++ theory questions, thread questions.