I've brought up easy solutions like this. The response is almost always "Well don't do that. You can't use that." I legitimately think it's because they don't understand that actual solution and are embarrassed about being shown up.
In the 1 or 2 cases where they just want to see you do it in X language, it always turns out so wildly inefficient. I don't understand what you're supposed to do.
"Don't use that 1 line textbook optimal solution. Use a for loop instead." Uhh.. Ok. I guess they want to see more lines of code? More code = more better engineer.
"Why are you using a double for loop? Why didn't you just use the built in method to solve this?"
Sometimes the "built in method" is literally the original solution you were presented, but slower. What are you supposed to do? If you can't use the optimal solution, why are they giving feedback on suboptimal code in a follow up answer?
It's like they're asking you to demolish a building, but you can't use TNT or heavy construction equipment. So you pick up a sledgehammer and talk about the weak points in the structure and how you have to have a plan and strategically knock down support beams to demonstrate your knowledge in this theoretical situation. But they just scream at you-- why would you use a sledgehammer instead of a wrecking ball?
"Wrecking ball isn't heavy equipment! It's built into.... A machine. Totally different."
Or why aren't you using a rocket launcher? I guess you're inexperienced. "Rocket launcher is totally different from TNT, of course! You didn't even think to use that! I guess you're not a real engineer, huh?"
I mean if someone limits you from using TNT when that's clearly the solution, using a rocket launcher should clearly not be in the spirit of the challenge they presented.
In the 1 or 2 cases where they just want to see you do it in X language, it always turns out so wildly inefficient. I don't understand what you're supposed to do.
"Don't use that 1 line textbook optimal solution. Use a for loop instead." Uhh.. Ok. I guess they want to see more lines of code? More code = more better engineer.
"Why are you using a double for loop? Why didn't you just use the built in method to solve this?"
Sometimes the "built in method" is literally the original solution you were presented, but slower. What are you supposed to do? If you can't use the optimal solution, why are they giving feedback on suboptimal code in a follow up answer?
It's like they're asking you to demolish a building, but you can't use TNT or heavy construction equipment. So you pick up a sledgehammer and talk about the weak points in the structure and how you have to have a plan and strategically knock down support beams to demonstrate your knowledge in this theoretical situation. But they just scream at you-- why would you use a sledgehammer instead of a wrecking ball?
"Wrecking ball isn't heavy equipment! It's built into.... A machine. Totally different."
Or why aren't you using a rocket launcher? I guess you're inexperienced. "Rocket launcher is totally different from TNT, of course! You didn't even think to use that! I guess you're not a real engineer, huh?"
I mean if someone limits you from using TNT when that's clearly the solution, using a rocket launcher should clearly not be in the spirit of the challenge they presented.