Well, the purpose of constructing an abstraction is at least as much about DRY and SRP as about providing extensible base classes in an object-oriented language

Well, the purpose of constructing an abstraction is at least as much about DRY and SRP as about providing extensible base classes in an object-oriented language. I think we tend to agree given that you prefer 'concise coding' which I'll take to mean DRY and 'straightforward' rather than 'clever'. But by 'picked over', I literally meant 'changed to meet changing requirements' rather than 'read for comprehension'. In that sense, the fact that one guy on the team considers the code he writes to be 'clean' is rather meaningless when many hands might work in that pathway. Composable approaches tend to be more resilient to regressions, well, in my experience anyway, YMMV. I guess my problem with 'clean code' is that it's too open to interpretation. What do you specifically do that makes your code better than the other guys?