PracHub
QuestionsPremiumCoachesLearningGuidesInterview Prep
|Home/Software Engineering Fundamentals/Rippling

Design poker-like hand comparison with custom ranking

Last updated: Mar 29, 2026

Quick Overview

This question evaluates object-oriented design, rule-based comparison logic, and algorithmic reasoning for ranking and tie-breaking of card hands, including skills in extensibility and comparison-key representation.

  • hard
  • Rippling
  • Software Engineering Fundamentals
  • Software Engineer

Design poker-like hand comparison with custom ranking

Company: Rippling

Role: Software Engineer

Category: Software Engineering Fundamentals

Difficulty: hard

Interview Round: Technical Screen

## Problem Design an object-oriented solution to compare two players’ hands in a card game similar to poker. You are given two hands (each a fixed number of cards; assume 5 unless you state otherwise). Each hand has a **hand type** (e.g., three-of-a-kind, pair, full house, etc.). ### Requirements 1. **Compare two hands** and return which one is larger (or if they tie). 2. If the two hands have **different types**, the winner is decided by the **type ranking** (e.g., full house > three-of-a-kind, etc.). 3. If the two hands have the **same type**, break ties by comparing the relevant card ranks in order. - Example: for three-of-a-kind, `8883x` should beat `7773x` because 8-trip > 7-trip (assume remaining kickers are compared after the trips if needed). 4. Provide an extension mechanism: - Implement `add_type(type_id: string, matches_function: function)` that registers a new hand type and how to detect it. - The main `evaluate` function takes an extra parameter `evaluation_orders: array<string>` that specifies the **type precedence** for comparing hands (allowing different games/rulesets). ### Deliverables - Sketch the class/module design (key classes, interfaces, responsibilities). - Explain how `add_type(...)` and `evaluation_orders` work together. - Describe the comparison logic, including tie-break rules and how to represent a hand’s “comparison key.” You may assume card ranks are totally ordered (e.g., 2..A) and suits exist if needed, but keep the design extensible.

Quick Answer: This question evaluates object-oriented design, rule-based comparison logic, and algorithmic reasoning for ranking and tie-breaking of card hands, including skills in extensibility and comparison-key representation.

Related Interview Questions

  • Design an extensible expense rule evaluator - Rippling (medium)
  • Design several backend components - Rippling (hard)
  • Implement a RESTful Q&A service - Rippling
  • Design an extensible poker-hand evaluator - Rippling (medium)
  • Design article voting and flip-tracking system - Rippling (medium)
Rippling logo
Rippling
Oct 22, 2025, 12:00 AM
Software Engineer
Technical Screen
Software Engineering Fundamentals
54
0

Problem

Design an object-oriented solution to compare two players’ hands in a card game similar to poker.

You are given two hands (each a fixed number of cards; assume 5 unless you state otherwise). Each hand has a hand type (e.g., three-of-a-kind, pair, full house, etc.).

Requirements

  1. Compare two hands and return which one is larger (or if they tie).
  2. If the two hands have different types , the winner is decided by the type ranking (e.g., full house > three-of-a-kind, etc.).
  3. If the two hands have the same type , break ties by comparing the relevant card ranks in order.
    • Example: for three-of-a-kind, 8883x should beat 7773x because 8-trip > 7-trip (assume remaining kickers are compared after the trips if needed).
  4. Provide an extension mechanism:
    • Implement add_type(type_id: string, matches_function: function) that registers a new hand type and how to detect it.
    • The main evaluate function takes an extra parameter evaluation_orders: array<string> that specifies the type precedence for comparing hands (allowing different games/rulesets).

Deliverables

  • Sketch the class/module design (key classes, interfaces, responsibilities).
  • Explain how add_type(...) and evaluation_orders work together.
  • Describe the comparison logic, including tie-break rules and how to represent a hand’s “comparison key.”

You may assume card ranks are totally ordered (e.g., 2..A) and suits exist if needed, but keep the design extensible.

Solution

Show

Submit Your Answer

Sign in to leave a comment

Loading comments...

Browse More Questions

More Software Engineering Fundamentals•More Rippling•More Software Engineer•Rippling Software Engineer•Rippling Software Engineering Fundamentals•Software Engineer Software Engineering Fundamentals
PracHub

Master your tech interviews with 8,500+ real questions from top companies.

Product

  • Questions
  • Learning Tracks
  • Interview Guides
  • Resources
  • Premium
  • For Universities
  • Student Access

Browse

  • By Company
  • By Role
  • By Category
  • Topic Hubs
  • SQL Questions
  • Compare Platforms
  • Discord Community

Support

  • support@prachub.com
  • (916) 541-4762

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • About Us

© 2026 PracHub. All rights reserved.