I think the whole problem with DRY is that it's too often about adopting layers of abstraction that aren't useful. They're not worth the overhead they demand.

I think the whole problem with DRY is that it's too often about adopting layers of abstraction that aren't useful. They're not worth the overhead they demand. Therefore, the opposite of the DRY issue could (should!) be Worth A Preemptive Unhooking of State. And most of that stuff will not be at all worth unhooking whatever state you've got in mind, in order to go into whatever layer of abstraction is required to DRY up something absolutely trivial and meaningless. Semantics matter. We need to be focussing on what's important in the problem set, not getting derailed into computational linquistics. Code that is WAPUS-Y might be deeply unfamiliar territory to our more rigorous brethren, because the very idea of asking whether something is Worth A Preemptive Unhooking of State implies there are matters outside what we learn in comp sci, a subject to our coding outside the coding itself. But that is so often true. And maybe this framing of it can be, erm, sticky and illustrative in its own right :D