In my workplace, there's an obsession with line-by-line code reuse. And the client uses a tool that uses LoC as measure of code re-usability.

Often for two modules, if the logic is same as of now, those modules call the same method. Which reduces no. of lines, but seems like a long-term manageability disaster.

Are my concerns valid? Or I'm missing something here?

Not a duplicate of this question, I am worried about plain LoC based measure. I understand breaking it down to smaller component, but it's not that.

In my workplace, the client is obsessed with line-by-line code reuse. And they use a tool that uses LoC as measure of code re-usability.

Often for two modules, if the logic is same as of now, those modules call the same method. Which reduces no. of lines, but seems like a long-term manageability disaster.

Are my concerns valid? Or I'm missing something here?

Not a duplicate of this question, I am worried about plain LoC based measure. I understand breaking it down to smaller component, but it's not that.

In my workplace, there's an obsession with line-by-line code reuse. And the client uses a tool that uses LoC as measure of code re-usability.

Often for two modules, if the logic is same as of now, those modules call the same method. Which reduces no. of lines, but seems like a long-term manageability disaster.

Are my concerns valid? Or I'm missing something here?

In my workplace, there's an obsession with line-by-line code reuse. And the client uses a tool that uses LoC as measure of code re-usability.

Often for two modules, if the logic is same as of now, those modules call the same method. Which reduces no. of lines, but seems like a long-term manageability disaster.

Are my concerns valid? Or I'm missing something here?

Not a duplicate of this question, I am worried about plain LoC based measure. I understand breaking it down to smaller component, but it's not that.