← Amazon Interview Insights

Amazon·Software Engineer·Technical Phone Screen·Intermediate

IntermediatePrefer not to say
Jun 2026

Summary

Amazon SWE coding round focused entirely on in-place array merging. The problem itself is LC 88 territory but the follow-ups kept stacking and I felt underprepared for the unsorted variant discussion.

Questions Asked (3)

Q1

Merge two sorted ascending arrays in-place, where the first array has enough trailing capacity to hold all elements from the second. No auxiliary array allowed.

Algorithms & Data Structures
Author's notes

I knew this one but still fumbled the justification for going back-to-front.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Use three pointers: one at the last valid element of the first array (m-1), one at the last element of the second array (n-1), and one at the last position of the first array's total capacity (m+n-1). Compare elements from the end and place the larger one at the write pointer, moving pointers backward. This avoids overwriting unprocessed elements and achieves O(m+n) time and O(1) space.

Pro tip: Clarify the problem constraints upfront (e.g., whether the arrays are truly in-place and if extra space is allowed) and mention edge cases like empty arrays or when one array is exhausted. This shows thoroughness and prevents misunderstandings.

1. Clarify and Confirm

Restate the problem to ensure understanding: merge two sorted arrays in-place, with the first array having enough trailing space. Confirm constraints like no auxiliary array and that arrays are sorted ascending.

2. Initialize Pointers

Set three pointers: i = m-1 (last element of first array), j = n-1 (last element of second array), and k = m+n-1 (last position of merged array).

3. Merge from the End

While i >= 0 and j >= 0, compare nums1[i] and nums2[j]. Place the larger at nums1[k], then decrement the corresponding pointer and k.

4. Handle Remaining Elements

If j >= 0 after the loop, copy remaining elements from nums2 into nums1. If i >= 0, they are already in place.

5. Analyze Complexity

State that time complexity is O(m+n) and space complexity is O(1), as no extra array is used.

Key Points to Mention

  • Three-pointer technique starting from the end to avoid overwriting
  • Time complexity O(m+n) and space complexity O(1)
  • Edge cases: one array empty, all elements of one array smaller than the other
  • In-place modification without auxiliary array
  • Stability is not required but can be discussed if asked
  • Comparison and placement logic to maintain sorted order

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

Q2

Same merge problem but both input arrays are in descending order instead of ascending. How does your solution change?

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

Easier than I expected once you realize it's just flipping the comparison operator and reversing pointer direction.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

Acknowledge that the core merge logic remains the same but the comparison direction flips: instead of picking the smaller element, you pick the larger one to build the merged array in descending order. Then discuss how to adapt the two-pointer technique, including edge cases and potential optimizations.

Pro tip: Mention that you can often avoid rewriting the merge by reversing both input arrays, merging as usual, and then reversing the result—this shows you think about code reuse and trade-offs. Also, clarify whether the output should be descending or ascending, as the question might imply a different requirement.

1. Clarify the output order

Confirm whether the merged array should be in descending order (matching inputs) or ascending. This determines the comparison direction.

2. Adjust the comparison

If output is descending, compare the current elements and pick the larger one to append. If ascending, pick the smaller one, but note that inputs are descending so you may need to traverse from the end.

3. Handle pointers and traversal

Use two pointers starting at the beginning (for descending output) or at the end (for ascending output). Explain how pointer movement changes accordingly.

4. Discuss edge cases and complexity

Cover empty arrays, one array exhausted, duplicates, and stability. Confirm time and space complexity remain O(n+m) and O(n+m) or O(1) if in-place.

5. Mention alternative approaches

Suggest reversing inputs, merging, and reversing back as a way to reuse existing code, and discuss the trade-offs (extra O(n+m) time and space).

Key Points to Mention

  • Two-pointer technique remains the core, but comparison operator flips from < to > (or vice versa).
  • Output order must be clarified: descending vs ascending changes the traversal direction.
  • Edge cases: one array empty, all elements of one array larger/smaller, duplicates.
  • Time complexity stays O(n+m); space complexity depends on whether merge is in-place.
  • Code reuse: reverse inputs, merge ascending, reverse result—simple but adds O(n+m) time and space.
  • Stability: if equal elements, which one to pick first? This may matter for certain applications.

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

Q3

What if the two input arrays are not sorted at all? Walk through your approach and the complexity tradeoffs.

Algorithms & Data StructuresTechnical Trade-offs
Author's notes

No coding required, just discussion, but I blanked on structuring the answer cleanly.

Create a free account to read the full note

AI HintsAI Generated

Suggested Approach

First, clarify the problem context: what operation is needed on the two unsorted arrays (e.g., find common elements, merge, find pairs summing to a target). Then, present multiple approaches with their time/space complexity tradeoffs, such as sorting both arrays first, using a hash set, or brute force. Finally, recommend the most suitable approach based on constraints like memory limits, input size, and whether the arrays can be modified.

Pro tip: Always ask clarifying questions about the expected output and constraints before diving into solutions; this shows you think before coding and aligns with Amazon's Leadership Principles like Customer Obsession and Dive Deep.

1. Clarify the problem

Ask what operation is required on the two unsorted arrays (e.g., intersection, union, pair sum) and any constraints on time, space, or input size. This ensures you solve the right problem.

2. Enumerate possible approaches

List viable strategies: brute force O(n*m), sorting both arrays O(n log n + m log m) then two-pointer, or using a hash set O(n+m) time with O(n) space. Mention if one array is much smaller, hash the smaller one.

3. Analyze complexity tradeoffs

Compare time and space complexities of each approach. Discuss when sorting is preferable (e.g., memory constrained, arrays can be modified) versus hashing (e.g., need O(n) time, extra space allowed).

4. Consider edge cases and practical factors

Address duplicates, large inputs, streaming data, and whether the arrays fit in memory. Mention that sorting may be done in-place to save space, while hashing requires extra memory.

5. Recommend and justify

Choose the best approach based on the clarified constraints and explain why, showing awareness of real-world tradeoffs. For example, if memory is tight, sort; if speed is critical, hash.

Key Points to Mention

  • Time and space complexity of each approach (brute force, sorting, hashing).
  • When to use sorting vs. hashing based on constraints (e.g., memory, input size, modification allowed).
  • Handling duplicates and ensuring correctness (e.g., using sets to deduplicate).
  • Potential for early termination or optimization if one array is much smaller.
  • Real-world considerations like data streaming, external sorting, or distributed processing.
  • Amazon Leadership Principles: Customer Obsession (clarify requirements), Dive Deep (analyze tradeoffs), Deliver Results (recommend efficient solution).

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