← Instacart Interview Insights
This one took me a second to even understand what 'canonical form' meant in context.
Start by clarifying the problem constraints (e.g., variable names, operator precedence, parentheses) and then outline a two-phase approach: tokenization and parsing. For parsing, use a recursive descent parser or shunting-yard algorithm to handle operator precedence and parentheses, building an expression tree. Finally, evaluate the tree by representing each subexpression as a linear combination of variables and a constant, then simplify to canonical form.
Pro tip: Mention that you can represent each subexpression as a tuple (coefficient of x, coefficient of y, constant) and perform addition/subtraction component-wise, which simplifies evaluation and avoids symbolic manipulation overhead. Also, discuss how to handle unary minus and implicit multiplication (e.g., '2x' meaning 2*x) if applicable, and clarify assumptions with the interviewer.
Ask about variable names, allowed operators, whitespace handling, and whether implicit multiplication (like '2x') is allowed. Confirm the expected output format and edge cases (e.g., empty string, single constant).
Scan the input string to produce tokens: numbers, variables, operators (+, -), and parentheses. Skip whitespace. Handle multi-digit numbers and possibly unary minus by context.
Use recursive descent or shunting-yard to parse tokens into an abstract syntax tree (AST) respecting operator precedence and parentheses. Explain how you handle left-associativity of + and -.
Traverse the AST, representing each node as a linear combination (coeff_x, coeff_y, constant). Combine children according to the operator. At the root, output the canonical form like 'a*x + b*y + c'.
State time complexity O(n) for tokenization and parsing, and O(n) for evaluation, where n is the length of the string. Discuss space complexity O(n) for the AST or stack. Mention edge cases like nested parentheses, negative coefficients, and zero coefficients.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.