← Stripe Interview Insights

Stripe·Software Engineer·Onsite - Coding / Algorithms·Senior

Senior
Apr 2026

Summary

Stripe coding round, software engineer role. The problem was a factory selection optimization with transport costs layered in, and it escalated across multiple parts. Decent problem if you like thinking about prefix arrays and DP, but the setup took a while to internalize.

Questions Asked (2)

Q1

You have three lists of factories, one per type. Each factory has a distance from origin and a production cost. Pick exactly one factory from each type to minimize total cost, where total cost includes each factory's production cost plus the transport cost between consecutive factories (transport cost = absolute difference in distances). How do you solve this efficiently?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

The naive triple-nested loop is obviously too slow and I think they were watching to see if I'd go there first.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Model the problem as a dynamic programming problem over the three factory types, where the state is the chosen factory from the current type. Since there are only three types, we can compute the minimum total cost by iterating through all combinations or using DP with O(n1*n2 + n2*n3) time. Discuss the trade-offs between brute force, DP, and potential optimizations like sorting or convex hull if the number of factories is large.

Pro tip: Mention that the transport cost is the L1 distance on a line, so the total cost can be rewritten as a sum of absolute differences; this often allows optimization by sorting and using prefix minima. Also, clarify that the order of types is fixed (type1 -> type2 -> type3) and that we must pick exactly one from each.

1. Clarify the problem and constraints

Confirm the number of types (3), that each factory has a distance and cost, and that transport cost is the absolute difference between consecutive chosen factories' distances. Ask about input size to determine the appropriate algorithm.

2. Define the DP state and recurrence

Let dp[i][j] be the minimum total cost to choose factories up to type i, ending with factory j of type i. The recurrence is dp[i][j] = cost[i][j] + min_k (dp[i-1][k] + |dist[i][j] - dist[i-1][k]|).

3. Compute the DP efficiently

For each type, compute the minimum over previous factories. Naively this is O(n_i * n_{i-1}), but can be optimized to O(n_i log n_{i-1}) or O(n_i + n_{i-1}) by sorting and using prefix minima, since the absolute value splits into two cases.

4. Analyze time and space complexity

State the complexity of the chosen approach. For example, if using the optimized method, total time is O(n1 log n1 + n2 log n2 + n3 log n3) or O(n1 + n2 + n3) after sorting. Space is O(n1 + n2 + n3) for storing DP arrays.

5. Discuss trade-offs and edge cases

Compare brute force (O(n1*n2*n3)) with DP and optimized DP. Mention edge cases: all factories same distance, large distances causing integer overflow, and the possibility of using a different order of types if allowed (but here order is fixed).

Key Points to Mention

  • Dynamic programming with state representing the last chosen factory.
  • Transport cost as absolute difference, which can be split into two linear cases for optimization.
  • Time complexity: O(n1*n2 + n2*n3) naive DP, or O(n log n) with sorting and prefix minima.
  • Space complexity: O(n) for storing DP arrays, can be reduced to O(1) if only previous layer is needed.
  • Edge cases: empty lists? (assume non-empty), large numbers, and ties in distances.
  • Trade-offs: brute force vs DP vs optimized DP, and when to use each based on input size.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q2

How would you generalize the factory selection problem to an arbitrary number of factory types instead of just three?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

They mentioned this as a follow-up almost as an aside, like they weren't expecting a full solution.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by restating the three-factory solution to identify the core pattern, then abstract it to k factories by generalizing the data structures and algorithm. Discuss the time and space complexity trade-offs and how the solution scales with k.

Pro tip: Mention that for large k, you might need to use a priority queue or dynamic programming with state compression, and always clarify constraints (e.g., k up to 10^5) to choose the right approach.

1. Clarify the problem and constraints

Ask about the input format, constraints on k, and whether factories have capacities or costs. This ensures you design an appropriate solution.

2. Review the three-factory solution

Briefly explain how the problem is solved for three factories, highlighting the key steps and data structures used.

3. Identify the generalizable pattern

Abstract the three-factory approach to k factories by replacing fixed variables with arrays or loops, and consider if the same algorithmic paradigm (e.g., DP, greedy) applies.

4. Analyze complexity and optimize

Discuss the time and space complexity of the generalized solution and propose optimizations (e.g., using heaps, segment trees) if needed for large k.

5. Discuss trade-offs and edge cases

Compare alternative approaches (e.g., brute force vs. optimized) and mention edge cases like k=1 or k very large.

Key Points to Mention

  • Generalization from 3 to k factories using arrays or lists instead of fixed variables.
  • Time complexity: O(k * n) or O(n log k) depending on approach, and how it scales.
  • Space complexity and potential memory optimizations.
  • Use of priority queues or dynamic programming for efficient selection.
  • Handling constraints: what if k is large? Consider approximation or greedy algorithms.
  • Edge cases: k=1, k=n, or factories with zero capacity.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.