As far as I am aware this is something of an innovation and I have to say that I am very impressed. Something happened in between. Justifiably, these people then become skeptical about polymorphism as well, because it is so strongly linked to inheritance. There are fewer places to look for bugs.
There are fewer places to modify when the requirements change. For instance, we use tactics like the binary chop: delete half the code, if the bug still occurs it must be in the remaining half, otherwise it was in the deleted half. Some people experience maintenance problems as a result of pervasive inheritance in OO systems.
I feel sure that before long, my Go playing will become more of a trudge as I learn joseki, work through problems etc.
One object can perfectly well be an Edit and several other things as well.
Contraints arise from procedures, rules, habits, norms, definitions, titles, etc.
Only the rigidity remains. Contraints arise from procedures, rules, habits, norms, definitions, titles, etc.
There are two main things I try to help with, when a team wants my help: clarity of purpose, and fresh ideas.
Who owns the ability to make Joe a better coder? For instance, we use tactics like the binary chop: delete half the code, if the bug still occurs it must be in the remaining half, otherwise it was in the deleted half. You make a mental note to give Bob a pat on the back soon.
We fix the problem and check in the fix. In particular, they know which inputs, outputs and transformations it pays to pay attention to. This is what feels most comfortable to me.
Kind of spooky - the conference that reads your mind.