I went with a stack-based approach, tracking function names and argument lists as I walked the string character by character.
Clarify the grammar and constraints, then propose a recursive descent parser that evaluates as it parses. Discuss handling nested calls, integer parsing, and operator precedence (though only add/sub are present).
Pro tip: Mention that you would write unit tests for edge cases like deeply nested calls, negative numbers, and whitespace variations to ensure robustness.
Ask about input format, allowed characters, maximum nesting depth, and whether arguments can be negative. Confirm the expected output type.
Formalize the expression grammar: expr := 'add(' expr ',' expr ')' | 'sub(' expr ',' expr ')' | integer. This helps in designing the parser.
Write a recursive function that parses the string, identifies the function name, parses arguments recursively, and applies the operation. Use an index pointer to track position.
Consider invalid input, unexpected tokens, and deep recursion (stack overflow). Discuss iterative alternatives or tail recursion if needed.
Time complexity is O(n) where n is string length; space O(d) for recursion depth. Compare with iterative stack-based parsing for memory efficiency.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.