Maybe it's just me, but this seems to either miss the point of a CS interview, or makes a point about CS interviews containing pointless parts making them trivial. If an interview contains a known set of possible questions and you simply remember the answers, than in the end the whole exercise is somewhat pointless, isn't it?
Yes you are right. This is why I take some standard problems but change things a little bit so they have to think a bit. And I ask additional questions like how would you test this function, how to change improve performance, etc.
Yes. People who claim that typical interview processes test "coding" or "CS fundamentals" or "algorithmic thinking" or whatever basically have to face the fact that they've really been testing for a set of skills that's different from what's needed by a working programmer. If they were testing for the actual skills of a programmer, there wouldn't be a cottage industry of books and classes and training materials to learn how to do "interview coding".
