> Yet this is apparently "standard required knowledge" for interviewing at google, amazon and co.
What makes you think that? My experience is that Google at least would never ask a question about red-black trees. I doubt Amazon would either. These big companies stick to questions that don't require a lot of specific knowledge because they know that a question about red-black trees mostly tests how recently you've studied red-black trees. I've done a bunch of whiteboard interviewing, and I would be shocked to be asked a question about red-black trees at a competently run company.
"Cracking the Coding Interview" explicitly mentions red-black trees as a topic that you're unlikely to see in an interview (for obvious reasons).
I think the places you see these sorts of questions asked are smaller companies that are imitating the big players without really understanding how to do it right.
Was it before or during interview? If during, like "you should have studied it", then it is wrong way yo do it.
If it was before, then I think it is fine. It basically test whether you are able to learn something like red-black trees when needed. I would consider such question a good one.
What makes you think that? My experience is that Google at least would never ask a question about red-black trees. I doubt Amazon would either. These big companies stick to questions that don't require a lot of specific knowledge because they know that a question about red-black trees mostly tests how recently you've studied red-black trees. I've done a bunch of whiteboard interviewing, and I would be shocked to be asked a question about red-black trees at a competently run company.
"Cracking the Coding Interview" explicitly mentions red-black trees as a topic that you're unlikely to see in an interview (for obvious reasons).
I think the places you see these sorts of questions asked are smaller companies that are imitating the big players without really understanding how to do it right.