[levemi]

I find it very difficult to imagine how an engineering position wont benefit from having strong CS fundamentals. If you write code you need to understand how the code you are writing works. How the libraries you depend on do what they do. If you run into problems you'll be need to able to think of solutions. This idea that you'll look up how to do some computer science algorithm when you need to is ignorant, because you may not know when you need it.

A lot of the CS fundamentals in interview questions demonstrate an ability for problem solving and abstract thinking. It demonstrates your ability to handle coding problems under stress. Resorting to complaining about hard computer science problems is the exact opposite response you should have. It should motivate you to improve and learn more, not feel bitter and angry. Likely this attitude indicates a poor culture fit as well. So in effect asking computer science question is doubly useful, because it helps filter out candidates who opt for alternatives to self-improvement and overcoming challenges.

[mindcrime]

You were replying to me, but I agree 100% with all of that, and it doesn't contradict anything I said, so I'm not sure what else to say. I guess I could just be more clear in saying that, for me personally, I'm not "complaining about hard computer science problems", I'm just thinking about how to optimize use of time. Personally, whether I'm the interviewer or the interviewee, I'm not partial to interview processes that take all day. That and I'm not partial to asking people to implement difficult algorithms on the whiteboard. My take is this:

1. If you're doing whiteboard stuff, keep it high level, see if the conceptual understanding is there, and move on.

OR

2. Give the candidate a computer, editor / IDE, compiler, google, etc., and let them work they way they work, implementing $WHATEVER.