How do you resolve a merge conflict in Git?
Open the conflicted files, decide what the final code should be between the conflict markers, remove the markers, run the tests, then stage the files and continue the merge or rebase.
Junior Developer 路 1-2 years
Junior interviews move from definitions to application. Expect to be asked how you would use a feature in real code, what goes wrong when you misuse it and how you would debug it.
91 questions
Open the conflicted files, decide what the final code should be between the conflict markers, remove the markers, run the tests, then stage the files and continue the merge or rebase.
Use a small, pinned base image, order instructions so dependencies are cached before source code, use multi-stage builds to leave build tools out of the final image, run as a non-root user and keep secrets out of the image.
Mocking replaces a real dependency with a controllable fake so a test can run in isolation and check how the code interacts with it; use it for slow, non-deterministic or external dependencies, not for everything.
Recursively walk the array: when an element is an array, flatten it and append the result; otherwise append the element. An iterative version uses an explicit stack to avoid recursion limits.
Choose a real project with a technical or organisational challenge, explain your specific role and decisions with the STAR method, and finish with the result and what you learned.
Walk through how you noticed the issue, limited the impact, found the root cause, fixed it, and what you changed afterwards so the same class of bug could not happen again.
Choose a real mistake, take ownership, explain the impact, what you did to recover, and what you changed so it would not happen again.
Describe feedback that was uncomfortable but useful, explain how you responded, and show the measurable or observable improvement that followed.
Choose a genuine failure, explain why it failed, what you owned, how you recovered, and what you changed in future projects.
Show how you prioritized the essential outcome, communicated trade-offs, reduced risk and delivered without pretending everything could be done.
Show that you can defend a technical decision with evidence while remaining open to a better argument.