The base case took maybe five minutes and I felt good about it.
Start by clarifying requirements and edge cases, then outline a parsing algorithm that splits on '&' and '=', decodes percent-encoded characters, and handles repeated keys by storing values in a list. Discuss trade-offs between using built-in libraries versus manual parsing, and how to handle malformed inputs gracefully.
Pro tip: Mention that in production ML systems, query strings often come from tracking parameters or API calls, so robustness to malformed input and consistent decoding (e.g., '+' as space) is critical; showing awareness of real-world data quirks impresses interviewers.
Ask about expected behavior for missing values, repeated keys, encoding standards (e.g., application/x-www-form-urlencoded), and malformed inputs. Confirm whether to use built-in libraries or implement manually.
Outline steps: split query string by '&', then each pair by '='. For each key-value pair, percent-decode both key and value, and handle missing '=' by treating value as empty string or None.
Decide on dictionary structure: map each key to a list of values to preserve order and duplicates. Discuss alternatives like last-value-wins and justify your choice based on use case.
Explain how to handle invalid percent-encoding (e.g., '%' not followed by two hex digits) by either raising an error or skipping/repairing. Mention decoding '+' as space for form-encoded data.
Compare manual parsing vs. using urllib.parse.parse_qs. Highlight performance, security (e.g., injection), and maintainability. Suggest test cases for edge cases like empty string, '&&', '=', and encoded characters.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.