> You're saying ... refactor the codebase to de-abstract and re-duplicate, undoing the work we did in the name of DRY in the first place. That's the exact oppo

> You're saying ... refactor the codebase to de-abstract and re-duplicate, undoing the work we did in the name of DRY in the first place. That's the exact opposite of what I'm advocating for, but perhaps I didn't express myself well. > Sooner or later we have a frankenfunction that's hundreds of lines long and branches a bazillion ways and might as well be a turing machine in itself. Yeah, that's not a good abstraction, and not at all what I meant.