El proceso tomó 1 día. Acudí a una entrevista en Everpure (San Jose, CA) en nov 2010
Entrevista
First step was a 30-minute web test which consisted of Graduate-level software engineering questions.
After passing that hurdle there was a one-hour phone interview base on a code fragment that was quite difficult. The interviewer was not friendly and the process did not seem to go well. The code fragment was C++ code (not quite compilable, but almost so). The code looked simple, but then the questions were not just about how C++ handles single- and multiple-inheritance. Instead they delved into how one might create data structures to compile multiple-inheritance classes, and in particular what the class memory lay-out might be.
This seemed to be a test to see if one could design a compiler, on the fly. Thank god compilers aren't actually designed that way.
Yet another company thinking they need folks right out of graduate school, IMHO. Hope that works out for them.
Preguntas de entrevista [1]
Pregunta 1
Given two base classes and a class derived from them how might one layout class instance memory so that polymorphism will work correctly. Problem was simplified in that one could assume memory was a series of same-sized slots and methods and attributes took up one slot each.
Acudí a una entrevista en Everpure (California City, CA)
Entrevista
It was the first round interview and was a Hacker rank with Easy-med leetcode qs including MCQs and fill in the blanks. 2 coding qs one was easy palindrome check.
Me postulé a través de otra fuente. Acudí a una entrevista en Everpure (Bengaluru) en ago 2025
Entrevista
Algorithm Round or Optical Illusion Puzzle?
Had an "interesting" experience with the so-called algorithm round. Still not sure if they were testing problem-solving skills or just hoping candidates would get lost in the formatting.
The highlight was a question on a bitbuddy tree (yep, that's what they called it) disguised in a 2D array format. Looked like a scene from Inception at first glance—layers within layers. Turns out, all it required was a plain old integer division. The challenge was more in deciphering what they were even asking, not solving the problem itself.
Would’ve appreciated a bit more clarity on what kind of "algorithm" knowledge they expect. Feels like they were going for clever, but ended up closer to cryptic.
The interview itself was easy, and the onsite seemed to go well with what sounded like positive feedback. That’s where the professionalism ended. After completing the onsite, there was no follow up and ghosted.
It’s unbelievable that a company would think this is acceptable after asking a candidate to invest significant time and effort. Ghosting after an onsite interview is disrespectful, lazy, and shows how little they value people.
Do not interview here. Total waste of time. If this is how they treat candidates, I can’t imagine how they treat employees. Never again.