Some interviews, maybe. As you say, it doesn't matter much for day-to-day work -- and so I put no weight on it when rating interviews either. If the candidate remembers the right method names, great. If they don't, who cares.
I always make a point of explaining that I'm not testing them on API memorization.
1) a good man is a good man and thus equal to other good men
Or
2) you proceed through so many qualifications and “but what if this guy was prettier or had nicer tone of voice than the other good man all else equal” etc until you admit that you include minute details like the exact placement of every hair follicle on some dudes head in your proposed total ordering of humanity
In particular, I'm not convinced the evaluation must extend from arguably relevant features to obviously irrelevant features. Even if I'm ultimately wrong, I can mount a defensible argument that memory is relevant to programming ability. I do not see a way to mount a defensible argument that (for example) facial features are relevant to programming ability.
Studying API trivia to show off in interviews is about as far off as it gets. So probably I’d choose the candidate who hadn’t done that. I’d rather risk a lazy coworker than one who fixates (even if competently) on the wrong problems. I’ve seen coworkers with that trait seriously drag down a team with low-signal nitpicking on others’ pull requests and designs, for example.
API knowledge is ideally a consequence of familiarity with the craft. Sort of like how vocabulary is a consequence of reading, writing, and interacting with well-read people. I’d rather have a conversation with someone who reads a moderate amount than with someone who decided to memorize the dictionary. The former knows fewer words, but I expect they’ll have more interesting things to say, even if none come across in the first 30 seconds.
Let's use your example of memorizing dictionary in some foreign language x. This person will be able to read faster and more efficiently without having to stuck on some unknown word and looking up dictionary every 2 minutes. At this state this person is just simply reading and focusing the brain on the content itself.
Likewise with memorizing programming stuff, the person can now just simply code and freeing the brain to just focus on the problem. Consequently more time to code moderate amount and ensure familiarity with the craft. I think this so called the 10x engineer that the author mentioned.
I also give a problem that doesn't use a lot of library functions.
I have never actually gotten a job where the interview had a variation of that question.
on edit: changed explain to exclaim, don't think it significantly changed the meaning in context however.