← Ambience Healthcare Interview Insights
I went with a hashmap plus a doubly linked list, which is the right call, but I fumbled explaining why the doubly linked list specifically.
Start by clarifying the requirements and constraints, then propose a hash map combined with a doubly linked list to achieve O(1) operations. Walk through the implementation details, covering get, put, updates, and edge cases, and finally analyze time and space complexity.
Pro tip: Mention that you would use a doubly linked list with sentinel head and tail nodes to simplify edge cases and avoid null checks, and discuss how this design can be extended for thread safety if needed.
Confirm the expected operations (get, put), capacity constraints, and any assumptions about key/value types. Ask about thread safety if relevant.
Explain that a hash map provides O(1) access to nodes, and a doubly linked list maintains recency order. Together they enable O(1) get and put.
Describe how get moves the accessed node to the front (most recently used), and put inserts or updates a node, moving it to the front and evicting the least recently used (tail) if capacity is exceeded.
Discuss handling of capacity zero (no storage), updating existing keys (update value and move to front), and missing keys (return -1 or equivalent).
State that both get and put are O(1) average time due to hash map and linked list operations, and space is O(capacity) for storing up to capacity entries.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.