The feedback that I got from the interview doesn't align with my performance in the interview. For the laptop coding test, I was told that I didn't add any comment/explanation for optimization which is completely false. I tried to explain this to the interviewer but they were not super interested in hearing that and asked me to add it as a comment which I did. The Javadoc comment for optimization was pretty clear in my opinion and the complexity of this algorithm was strong enough to solve the constraint stated in the problem (nlogn for 10^5 data-points). The initial debriefing took about 25-30 minutes instead of the allocated 15 minutes because the interviewers struggled to resolve confusion that I had regarding one of the test cases. Due to this, there wasn't enough room at the end and we left in a hurry. In the CS fundamentals interview, it was stated that my solution had a memory leak. But we were dealing with about 40 or so data points, so practically it becomes difficult to see memory leak in such scenarios. A better hint from the interviewer might be to ask if such a solution would lead to any potential problem at a bigger scale or not. Apart from this, the interviewer informed that the solution had this problem rather than asking if the solution had any potential problems.