Puzzles no, but it really matters how candidates are evaluated on coding. For coding, if a coding question boils down to implementing KMP string matching or so

Puzzles no, but it really matters how candidates are evaluated on coding. For coding, if a coding question boils down to implementing KMP string matching or something that's only realistically solvable by memorizing the entire algorithm and writing it out on a whiteboard, then it's not any different than any of the puzzle type questions like "why are manholes round?" The proper way to evaluate coding questions, and what is mentioned in the article, is that one is evaluating general intelligence in the context of software programming. Is the candidate coming up with a reasonable solution? Are they asking questions to understand the problem better? If they get stumped by something, do they stay stuck on it, ask for help, or think through it? Can they find the issues with their code and improve on it? I haven't heard of a better way to interview engineers, but if there is I'm definitely all ears.