Here’s some counter-argument psuedo-code: // v1, mixing layers of abstraction x = a if exists, else first() y = b if exists, else second() resu

Here’s some counter-argument psuedo-code: // v1, mixing layers of abstraction x = a if exists, else first() y = b if exists, else second() result = third(x,y) // v2, abstraction result = getResult(a,b) In v1, we have the semantics of x and y, so we understand that a “result” is obtained through the acquisition of x and y. Whether we need to understand this is a judgement call. But v2 opens a different “failure to understand” modality: “getResult” is so blackboxed that the only thing it really accomplished is indirection, without improving readability. I love Clean Code, but I think it sometimes prematurely favors naming a new function and the resultant indirection.