[ziml77]

I did something like step #2 in C# some years ago. Pulled data from the database based on the calling function’s name.

Clean Code was mental poison for me and certainly led to a bunch of overly abstracted or overly-DRY code.

[Waterluvian]

I feel like every coder has to overdo it at least once to truly grok why it is a balancing act. And I think that oftentimes leads to the discovery that every best practice is a balancing act.

[bitexploder]

A good rule is two maybe even three duplications is ok. After that, probably tome to refactor at least a little. Often this rule of thumb saves some efforts.

[idontwantthis]

W.E.T. then D.R.Y.

(Write Everything Twice)

[Rexxar]

The rule should not be primarily based on a number of duplications but if we know that all the duplicated parts need to be changed when one is changed.

[ziml77]

You're probably right on that. I now weigh my options to try to find a middle ground between impossible to change because it wasn't designed for change and impossible to change because it was designed for too many future use cases that will never happen.

[ahartmetz]

IME, extensible code comes from thinking of possible extensions and then not getting in their way, which usually just means keeping it simple. Easy to say but hard to do.