The recruitment process itself was straightforward and well communicated — the recruiter was responsive and the SSH-based coding environment was an interesting setup. The interviewer was collaborative rather than adversarial, which made the session more pleasant than expected. My main observation is a disconnect between the stated requirements and what was actually tested. The role asks for 5+ years of C++ experience and lists low-level hardware interface work as core responsibilities — ASICs, PCIe, device drivers. The coding interview however consisted of classic algorithmic exercises that felt more at home in a junior or graduate assessment. These questions test something different from what experienced C++ engineers actually do day to day. Someone with 5+ years of serious C++ work has long since stopped reimplementing standard algorithms from scratch — not because they can't, but because reaching for the standard library or Boost is the correct engineering instinct at that level. The mismatch between job description and interview content might be worth revisiting. The role sounds genuinely interesting — the interview just didn't reflect it. Bonus points for fast communication though.