The underspecified part is where I spent most of my mental energy.
Start by clarifying the requirements and constraints with the interviewer, then outline a simple, extensible design before coding. Implement the core functionality incrementally, testing each command, and be prepared to discuss trade-offs and potential extensions.
Pro tip: Demonstrate adaptability by acknowledging the ambiguity and proposing a minimal viable solution first, then iterating based on feedback. This shows you can deliver value quickly while remaining open to change.
Ask questions to understand the expected behavior, edge cases, and constraints. For example, confirm the coordinate system, command input format, and whether the rover can move off the grid.
Sketch a simple design: a Rover class with position (x, y) and direction (N, E, S, W), and methods for turn_left, turn_right, and move. Consider using an enum for directions and a mapping for turns.
Code the basic functionality first, then add tests or manual verification. Start with initialization, then implement each command, ensuring correct state updates.
Run through example command sequences to verify correctness. Discuss how you would handle invalid commands or boundary conditions.
Talk about potential extensions like obstacles, multiple rovers, or a command parser. Mention trade-offs between simplicity and extensibility, and how you would refactor if requirements change.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.