Well written article > DON'T BE AFRAID TO DISMANTLE THE WRONG ABSTRACTION Couldn't agree more with the statement, though I don't completely agree with the aut

Well written article > DON'T BE AFRAID TO DISMANTLE THE WRONG ABSTRACTION Couldn't agree more with the statement, though I don't completely agree with the author's suggestion to copy paste. Duplicating code _is debt_. It may help us go faster now, but it'll almost inevitably come back to bite. It is manageable if 1/2 people do it 1/2 times - definitely not manageable if 5/6 people do it 5/6 times. I believe the general hesitation of not touching a piece of code (or, getting by with that optional param) is due to the fear of fucking things up. Having your code test covered gives an amazing amount of confidence to rip apart old abstractions to yield newer ones that serve the purpose of the _current code_. To me, this route is more preferable to duplicating code. Even with the best of intentions, Hacking an abstraction with that one optional parameter is inevitable. Tests help in our ability to repay that debt faster - on time & in full. Basically they make all abstractions a lot cheaper - easier to write and easier to throw away. Thereby solving the problem of having a 'wrong abstraction' too early.