Software Engineer (Entry-level)
Interview Date
September 13, 2025
Result
Rejected (did not advance beyond Round 1)
Difficulty
Hard
Rounds
1 (Online Assessment, out of 6 total rounds)
Drive Type
Full-Time
Topics asked
Detailed experience
College: Final-year student
Interview Date: September 13, 2025
Interview Type: Full-Time
Result: Rejected (did not advance beyond Round 1)
Difficulty: Hard
Rounds: 1 (Online Assessment, out of 6 total rounds)
Topics Asked: Data Structures & Algorithms (2D DP for Interleaving String, working backwards from Y → X for Broken Calculator, Hashing + Bitmask for Maximum Product of Word Lengths).
This experience describes an interview for an entry-level Software Engineer position in Gurgaon. The candidate was a final-year student with academic and internship projects (MERN stack, DSA practice). The company's process was stated to have 6 eliminatory rounds.
Round 1 (Online Assessment): This round featured three LeetCode problems (hard/medium difficulty). The specific questions mentioned were: "Interleaving String" (concept tested: 2D DP with memoization), "Broken Calculator" (concept tested: working backwards from Y → X using division and increment operations efficiently), and "Maximum Product of Word Lengths" (concept tested: Hashing + bitmask optimization).
Obstacles faced during the round included frequent crashes of the sandbox compiler, leading to auto-refreshing and loss of progress. The only suggestion given was "refresh again", which did not resolve the issue. Due to these platform instability issues, the candidate was only able to fully submit one question despite having working approaches for others.
The candidate did not advance beyond Round 1 due to these submission issues. The difficulty level of Round 1 questions was considered comparable to top product-based companies (Amazon, Adobe, Microsoft). The overall candidate experience was described as disappointing due to platform instability. The company required candidates to travel to Gurgaon at their own expense, with no reimbursement or support.
Suggestions for improvement included ensuring reliable coding platforms, providing on-site technical support, aligning question difficulty with compensation structure, and offering at least minimal feedback to candidates.