I think it is a balance. Despite having quite functional IDEs now a days, it is still more error prone to change 10 instances of math.random than a single function you define modularly. If you think there is a good chance such an extension might be needed in future or that you might want to change libraries later on, I wouldn't necessarily call this a bad decision, even if it goes unused.

YAGNI works best when it prevents adding complex unused futures which are error prone and complicates a simpler program logic and flow. In this case you are just encapsulating a function inside another one without any change to program complexity.

[–] Jesus_666@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago

It definitely depends on the use case. I could accept this being abstracted out to facilitate mocking, for instance (although I'd recommend mocking at a higher level). But in general this wouldn't pass review with me unless I get a good explanation for why it's necessary.