I'm pretty sure during an interview once someone made a very similar joke when I'd written using Rust syntax instead of Javascript. I thought it was funny and thanked them for tactfully pointing out my syntax errors and confirmed I had been writing Rust a lot recently.

The only other choices for the interviewer are to bluntly say "you missed using semicolons" or to not say anything and be left to wonder if the person knows how to really write in C. The author of this post seems to think even considering any other choice than the last is rude since "whiteboard code doesn't compile so semicolons are syntactic sugar".

But if it does matter, baking in some understanding of the charitable reasons why (that the interviewee is proficient at multiple languages, especially in the popular ones at Apple like Swift) is actually the nicest thing the interviewer could have done.

The post author seems to me hostile to being corrected. Given that every code review I've been in requires being corrected dozens of times about errors large and small, I wouldn't want to have to deal with their uncharitable attitude towards feedback from coworkers/collaborators.

Tone and timing matters. If the interviewer had interrupted the candidate's train of thought, or spoken it during a particularly tense moment, it can really throw off their game.

Code reviews after already being hired and accepted into a company are not comparable to interviews during the application process, when the specter of rejection still looms.

First, would you respond to my question? :) In the case of the other commenter's suggested joke, you said "That sounds completely fine to me", so I genuinely want to know why one joke is completely fine and the other falls into the bucket "If you’re making jokes like this in an interview, you shouldn’t be an interviewer".

Anyhow, to answer you, on both sides of interviews, I've experienced bad chemistry early in the session. Could be any number of factors, even just one of the two of us getting out on the wrong side of bed that morning. I sometimes will make a joke to lighten things up and get things back on track. Sometimes it helps, sometimes not, but I like to feel over time I am learning better how to interact with humans, and improving my odds, leading to more positive interview experiences and less wasted time. Things are never "strictly technical" with humans.

(all that said, to be clear, I have never brought up the candidate's sense of humor in providing feedback, although I don't see a problem doing so if humor is in the team's values manifesto or the job description, and we've agreed on a legitimate way to screen for it (seems hard!). Curious to learn others' thoughts on this subject!)

Sure! We only have the candidate's perspective, but it appears that the candidate:

1) felt that the tone of the interviewer was negative

2) was in the middle of writing their solution

3) did not actively ask for feedback on syntax

Point #1 is subjective, but an interviewer should err on the side of caution when making curt remarks like this. Taken together, points #2 and #3 are important too: as an interviewer, you should know when (or even whether or not) to provide feedback.

As for why I believe the comment above phrased it better:

1) the interviewer is clearly acknowledging that it can be challenging to use a different language in an interview

2) the interviewer is clearly stating that the syntax mistakes being made are minor and nothing to worry about

Personally, I would still avoid making this kind of comment unless prompted by the candidate - e.g., in reply to "I think I might be making a few mistakes with syntax here". I would also avoid providing any feedback.

I also agree that an interview is not purely technical: there are other _passive_ signals you can use to build a better picture. I don't see how you would be able to judge sense of humor reliably in an interview setting, though.

Thank you! Not much to argue with, rather just nodding my head. I hope one of us interviews the other some day, and that we have a chance to debrief after.

A positive reading is “you must be coding Swift a lot lately, I acknowledge switching languages is hard and won’t fault you for it”.

A negative reading is “you are screwing this up enough for me to comment, you need to justify why”

If it’s intended to be reassuring then phrasing it so it’s clearly not a criticism is better. If it’s intended as a criticism then phrasing it clearly is also better.

The way I can see it being a joke, as claimed, is insultingly. Like a dentist watching a trainee dentist doing a filling and saying “you must have been doing masonry work lately”. Haha but the subtext is “you’re really doing a bad job of this”.