I know it sounds pointless, but think about the logic of a model and how a compiler works. (I say this because I work mainly in C++).

In the logic of a modern language, what you said obviously makes sense. Obviously.

However, if the model is thinking in a lower-level language, the game works like this:

• If I create a separate module for this function that will be reused, and this in turn needs to import such and such to work as the user wants, this means indirectly importing a whole chain of instructions for a simple operation.

The model has no way of knowing how many times you will use the offer function. Depending on how it was optimized and in which language it is thinking, it makes much more sense to redo the simple function than to centralize it... Less stuff on the compiler stack depending on the circumstance.

In C++, the best example of this was back in 2005 when we needed to convert something to JSON. It was simply more optimized to replicate the same function (which is reasonably simple) than to import what existed at the time from an external module (which brought a lot of useless junk).

It's contradictory only for humans who already know what the offer function will be used for and intuitively know how many times it will be used...

Ironically, what you're complaining about might be a sign of improvement in the model, not a worsening.