The author states: >"kustomize would be the most well known tool now it that is it integrated into kubectl. This seems to work well enough and could be feasibl

The author states: >"kustomize would be the most well known tool now it that is it integrated into kubectl. This seems to work well enough and could be feasible for simple use cases. In comparison to data configuration languages though, this strategy breaks down when configurations grow in complexity and scale. Template writers lack abstraction and type validation that matters when things get complicated, as the semantics are locked into an opaque tool and not exposed as language features." How exactly does this strategy break down? This sounds a bit hand-wavey to me. Isn't Kustomize essentially patching? And isn't the type validation done by the underlying API objects in the yaml that Kustomize is patching? Am I missing something obvious or a more subtle point?