There are some big companies, in which the interviewer told me secretly
"if you don't do tons of LeetCode, don't even think about getting into our company"
Another one I heard was
"if you can't give the most optimal solution in the phone interview (which was a medium hard LeetCode problem), don't even think about getting an onsite interview"
For some questions in LeetCode, it can be we work in the real world (especially as Front End development) for 10 years, and never use once. So getting into the company just means doing a lot of LeetCode problems. How can it make sense, or should we just take it "the way it is"?
Kind of like SAT: if you can't give a synonym of "abnegation" or "adumbrate", you just get a lower score and can't get into your dream school, that's it.
There is also somebody who said he
got warmed up by doing 300 Leetcode problems, and then he did 600 of them
On the other spectrum, there are also people who said LeetCode doesn't work, and that the interviewers only want to see how you behave in a getting stuck or difficult situation, and some say want to see how you cooperate with interviewer and discuss and reach a possible solution... I wonder how true it is, as it usually seemed the interview just pushed and pushed and say your code is 100% correct, and what is better, and when better is given, what is the most optimal.
Sometimes, the most optimal for people who haven't seen the problem before took them days or even months to reach it.