I'm surprised at the shock and awe. It's a test. It's not production code. It runs and is able to verify behavior. It runs isolated, and no other code is runni

I'm surprised at the shock and awe. It's a test. It's not production code. It runs and is able to verify behavior. It runs isolated, and no other code is running when it does. Building publishAt is more powerful than publishNow, but building something more powerful than what you need is hardly good practice. And you still end up with the problem of how you test the code calling publishAt. This isn't some whack job in the corner saying something he came up with is a good idea. This is how the Ruby community thinks and writes software, with great success. And it does in fact clash with other communities. The point of this discussion isn't really whether one approach is better than the other. The point is that our tools (specifically dynamic languages with flexible metaprogramming) drastically influence our view of what is acceptable. Your strong disagreement demonstrates the point.