← Asana Interview Insights

Asana·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

Intermediate
May 2026

Summary

Asana software engineer interview with three coding problems back to back. Nothing behavioral, just pure implementation and problem-solving. The canvas question was the wildest one I've seen in a while.

Questions Asked (3)

Q1

Build a small ASCII drawing engine for a fixed 10x6 canvas. Each cell holds a character and an optional color. Implement draw_rectangle, drag_and_drop, and erase_area operations, then render the canvas as text. Discuss edge cases.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

This one took me a second to parse.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements and constraints, then outline a simple data model (2D array of cells with char and color). Implement each operation with clear semantics, handle edge cases like out-of-bounds and overlapping regions, and discuss trade-offs such as validation vs. performance.

Pro tip: Proactively discuss how you would test the engine, including edge cases and potential property-based tests, to demonstrate thoroughness and quality focus.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Ask questions to confirm canvas size, color representation, operation semantics (e.g., overwrite vs. merge), and expected edge cases. This ensures you build the right thing.

2. Design data model and API

Propose a simple 2D array of cells, each with a character and optional color. Define function signatures for draw_rectangle, drag_and_drop, and erase_area.

3. Implement operations with edge case handling

Write pseudocode for each operation, explicitly handling out-of-bounds coordinates, invalid dimensions, and overlapping regions. Discuss whether to clip or reject.

4. Render canvas and discuss trade-offs

Explain how to convert the 2D array to a string, including color codes if needed. Discuss trade-offs like validation overhead vs. performance, and simplicity vs. flexibility.

5. Test and validate

Outline a testing strategy covering normal cases, edge cases (empty canvas, full canvas, overlapping operations), and potential property-based tests.

Key Points to Mention

  • Coordinate system: origin at top-left, (0,0) to (9,5) for 10x6 canvas.
  • Out-of-bounds handling: clip rectangles to canvas boundaries or reject with error; be consistent.
  • Color representation: optional color per cell, e.g., as an enum or string; rendering may include ANSI codes.
  • Drag and drop semantics: source and destination regions, handling overlaps and preserving or overwriting data.
  • Erase area: set cells to default character (e.g., space) and clear color.
  • Performance considerations: operations are O(area) for rectangle, O(1) for single cell; canvas size fixed so negligible.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q2

Given an integer array, return a new array where each element is the product of all other elements. No division allowed, O(n) time, O(1) extra space beyond the output array. Handle zeros.

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

Classic prefix/suffix product pattern.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Use a two-pass approach: first compute prefix products and store them in the output array, then traverse from right to left while maintaining a running suffix product to multiply into each position. This achieves O(n) time and O(1) extra space (beyond the output). Zeros are handled naturally because the prefix/suffix products will be zero where appropriate.

Pro tip: Explicitly discuss how the algorithm handles zeros without special-casing, and mention that the output array is used as temporary storage to meet the O(1) extra space constraint. This shows you understand the space complexity nuance and edge cases.

1. Clarify requirements and edge cases

Confirm that division is not allowed, time complexity must be O(n), and extra space is O(1) beyond the output. Discuss edge cases: empty array, single element, multiple zeros, and negative numbers.

2. Explain the two-pass prefix/suffix product approach

Describe how to compute prefix products in the first pass and store them in the output array, then compute suffix products on the fly in the second pass and multiply them into the output.

3. Walk through an example including zeros

Use a concrete example like [1,2,0,4] to demonstrate how the algorithm produces correct results without division, highlighting that zeros are handled automatically.

4. Analyze complexity and space usage

State that the algorithm runs in O(n) time and uses O(1) extra space because the output array is reused for intermediate prefix products.

5. Discuss potential pitfalls and alternatives

Mention that a naive division approach fails with zeros, and that using two separate arrays would violate the space constraint. Optionally, note that the order of passes can be swapped.

Key Points to Mention

  • Two-pass approach: left-to-right for prefix products, right-to-left for suffix products.
  • No division used, so zeros are handled naturally without special cases.
  • O(n) time complexity and O(1) extra space (output array reused).
  • Edge cases: empty array, single element, multiple zeros, negative numbers.
  • The output array serves as temporary storage for prefix products.
  • Comparison with division-based approach and why it fails with zeros.

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.

Q3

Count how many times each IP address appears in a very large local log file that may not fit in memory. Discuss parsing, validation edge cases, and performance tradeoffs.

System DesignTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

I went straight to external sorting or chunk-based streaming since the file can't fit in RAM.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Start by clarifying requirements: file size, memory limit, expected IP format, and whether approximate counts are acceptable. Then propose a streaming line-by-line approach using a hash map, and discuss how to handle memory constraints via partitioning or external sorting. Finally, address parsing and validation edge cases and performance tradeoffs.

Pro tip: Mention that you would first check if the file fits in memory; if not, use a two-pass approach with partitioning by IP hash to ensure each partition fits in memory. This shows you consider practical constraints before optimizing.

1. Clarify requirements and constraints

Ask about file size, available memory, expected IP formats, and whether exact counts are required. This determines the approach.

2. Design a streaming solution

Propose reading the file line by line, parsing each line to extract the IP, validating it, and updating a hash map count. This uses O(unique IPs) memory.

3. Handle memory constraints

If the hash map exceeds memory, use partitioning: hash IPs into N buckets, write to temp files, then count each bucket separately. Alternatively, use external sorting.

4. Address parsing and validation

Discuss edge cases: malformed lines, IPv4 vs IPv6, leading zeros, whitespace, and invalid octets. Decide whether to skip, log, or count invalid entries.

5. Discuss performance tradeoffs

Compare time vs space: in-memory hash map is fast but memory-heavy; partitioning adds I/O but scales. Mention using efficient parsing (e.g., regex vs manual) and potential parallelism.

Key Points to Mention

  • Streaming line-by-line processing to avoid loading entire file into memory
  • Using a hash map (dictionary) to count occurrences, with memory proportional to unique IPs
  • Partitioning by IP hash to handle memory limits, writing to temporary files
  • Validation of IP addresses: IPv4 vs IPv6, format checks, handling invalid lines
  • Performance tradeoffs: time complexity O(n), memory O(u), I/O overhead in partitioning
  • Potential optimizations: using a trie for IP storage, parallel processing with multiple threads/processes

AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.