🚀 go-pugleaf

... ML i Lispem

"On the other hand, just because templates are the best C++ has to
offer doesn't mean they're good. It turns out that all the problems
templates solve were already solved better, before templates were
ever introduced, by other languages. In fact, the kludgey way
templates work precludes C++ programmers from a lot of the good
stuff that nicer solutions have.
[...]
For one thing, templates hurt the C++ compiler's ability to generate
efficient code. It might surprise you to hear that, considering that
C++ is "efficient" while functional languages like ML and Scheme are
"inefficient," but it's true. C++ templates hide your intentions
from the compiler: did you mean type abstraction? Did you mean a
syntax extension? Did you mean constant-folding or compile-time code
generation? The compiler doesn't know, so it has to just blindly
apply the copy-and-paste strategy and then see what happens. In ML
or Scheme, though, aside from the individual benefits described
above, the simple fact that you're telling the compiler what you
want to achieve lets it optimize for you much more effectively.
[...]
But from a broader perspective, realizing that templates are really
just a C++ version of Lisp macros geared towards generating type
declarations rather than extending C++'s syntax helps you understand
the wider history of programming languages rather than just knowing
the flavor of the month (which is rapidly becoming the flavor of
last month!)...

Artykul "What's Wrong with C++ Templates?" tutaj

http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~jacobm/pubs/templates.html

A.L.