Both of the examples above are actual things I've seen. As for this one, it was not better programming, it was just over-engineered. I think that over-engineering is a stage all developers go through in their career. What is considered "better programming" certainly contributes to the problem.

It took 4 times as long to produce the solution that was 4 times bigger and more complex than it needed to be. Maintaining that huge body of code forever is more than 4x the effort over time than a single small function. And that's how you get a 0.25x (or less) programmer.