[jstimpfle]

> But you were talking about generics, which implied you were incorrectly conflating that with template meta-programming, since generics are done with templates.

I'm aware this is a pointless discussion, but please double check your claims are right if we are in "check mode". I did not say "generics".

>> Any examples of using compile time features that make a difference, instead of making code harder to maintian and increasing compile times significantly?

> My recommendation would be to avoid speculating on what the benefits are of a language or its features if you clearly don't have serious experience using them. It's fine if C++ is not for you.

Maybe you shouldn't make such statements if you don't know about my experience. I am speaking from experience, and exchanging subjective experiences isn't worthwhile most of the time, but sometimes (if people don't go down to personal attacks) there is a new viewpoint to find.

[hellofunk]

> I did not say "generics".

FYI if you’re talking about compile-time programming and you use the word “generic“ (as you did, in the context of a generic sort, which actually does have a meaning related to generics, as the routine works on containers of any type), note that this is a well-established term, which could be confusing if you actually are referring to something else.