Jesus christ I didn't have to pass any sort of this bullshit to get my job, nor do I think a person should have to... are these tests things that they expect you to pass or just exercises so they can see how you work through a problem?
It's a computer scientist's job to solve problems, so I'd imagine something like "select the best algorithm to do this within the time constraint" is a very useful test to rate someone's ability.
At my job the correct answer to the sorting problem is "import a library with efficient sorting algorithms" because you're wasting time if you write that shit yourself. Of course the idea is that you should be -able- to do that stuff if necessary, but if someone's sitting down to optimize some code I'd expect them to understand things like amdahl's law and to be thorough about it, not implement a breakthrough algorithm in a single 6 hour session.
You also don't write software that shoots people into space.
@Oh_Man Well it wouldn't hurt. I explained via closing email that my solution took too long because my solution was too complex. But in the end it is my fault for not understanding what kind of communication was expected. In my mind email is not like instant messaging, but the idea was to have a more open discussion about the problem. Communication skills are one of the job reqs and it seems I need to work on that. Live and learn.
If you tried to implement an over-engineered solution that's a technical problem, not a communicative one.
Why couldn't I have used strcmp? I misunderstood something the proctor said over email. Again, it's my poor communication, not tech deficiency.
You've never asked teachers in school for help on explaining a question? Reading instructions, and carefully, is extremely important.
Yeah well, not everyone interviews like you or I would. So, I have to play their game.
It's not a game because there are things called deadlines. Being able to manage your time most effectively is a important ability when approaching any problem. This is especially true for a place like SpaceX, which is in a business where deadlines aren't things that can be flexed.
If it's any consolation, my gut instinct that any place with a recruiting procedure as inefficient and confusion-prone as the one you describe is likely not a great place to work. There's a correlation between how companies recruit people, and how people work there.
It's highly efficient, because it effectively grades people on their merit. They even gave Cecil a second chance to prove his technical ability. I think it does a disservice to be in denial about yourself.
None.