Absolutely. I try to convey this in my interviews that I do have questions, but want to keep it low pressure and the goal is to get an honest assessment of who

Absolutely. I try to convey this in my interviews that I do have questions, but want to keep it low pressure and the goal is to get an honest assessment of who you are. If someone gets a question wrong, I explain why and ask them how they would alter knowing the issue. One thing I've found pretty helpful with this is a code sample demonstrating mutable default args in python. Most juniors and a surprising number of mids haven't come across this even after 2 or more years of experience with the language, so they're surprised by it. I then explain how the issue happens, and then ask them how they would fix the function. For me, its those kind of questions where you as an interviewer are able to provide a tiny hint or nudge when the person is stuck that gives much more insight. They're not getting the answer, and are doing the work themselves but doing that in a bit of an unnatural environment like an interview makes me very, very happy for them. I had an interview with a candidate who didn't know python much, but liked it for its conciseness for interviewing, but worked in golang regularly. Candidate hadn't heard of this, and was surprised by it, and after understanding the reason behind the behavior, we ended up on a pretty enjoyable tangental discussion of how other languages had similar gotchas and the experiences thereof. Conversely, when a person is interviewing for a role at a much higher level than they're qualified for and are missing things despite hints, suggestions and outright pointers, its a significant letdown, and I hope those candidates are able to use these questions as guideposts of where to increase their knowledge and awareness.