You would have an interesting point, but this isn’t just my opinion vs your opinion.

I included runnable program code which clearly demonstrates the connection between imperative vs declarative composition and the need for mocks and unit tests.

By using a generic composition utility, you eliminate the connective logic from your own code, and shift the responsibility for composition (and with it, the responsibility for testing composition logic) out of your own code and onto the generic utility, which has its own tests.

In other words, I specified exactly what I meant well enough that there is runnable code which proves the point.

There is no room for opinion or disagreement here. That’s what I love so much about math and logic. It’s not about opinions or subjectivity or feelings or preferences.

There is a provable, independently discoverable, independently testable mathematical relationship. The proof is in the article.

In other words, there’s no need to take my word for it. Run & explore the code, and prove it to yourself.