I blew an interview recently because of this. Of course, I can't be 100% sure this is why, because I interviewed for six hours, but it was the only part where I felt like I wasn't doing well. I really fumbled at the whiteboard on some tree walking algorithms . If I had reviewed my data structures and algorithms book, I would have rocked these questions. What could have come off as a strong point instead came off as weak and rusty.

I do think that the company lost out on a good hire because of this. The job requires some specialized math, as well as domain knowledge and programming ability. I don't think there are many people will this skillset.

But next time, I will most definitely review this material prior to the interview, because it really cost me.

yea I don't really see the point of memorizing CS trivia when

A) I can google it if I ever need to know B) Most languages today have support for graphs, trees, and sorts, and other cs trivia things built in or via stable libraries

It seems like a potential employee's ability to 'get things done' would be more important

It isn't trivia. You can "get things done" a lot faster when you don't have to A) google all week for the answer or B) try out multiple half-baked implementations.

I don't have an issue with Gooogle's requirement to know what you are doing, but unfortunately I think the interesting jobs at Google are becoming few and far between.

I feel like there is a focus on what I would call trivial details built into the assumption that a good candidate should be able to explain how all of these things work in an interview. There's a huge difference between not knowing why you might want to keep a binary tree balanced and not knowing how red/black trees work off the top of your head. If you've heard of them and know what they're good for, you can look them up in a few seconds when you need them.

Of course, a talented hacker will know the details of some data structures and algorithms. I'd be far more impressed with a candidate who could tell me in detail about recent uses of a couple more unusual data structures and algorithms than with a candidate who knew all the classics in detail but nothing unusual.