Understanding Templates: why can't anybody do it?

[Nick Sabalausky]

"novice2" <sorry at noem.ail> wrote in message 
news:hzbmfpsyzezjwzshxjsp at forum.dlang.org...
> How it come, that we build another abstartion level above strong typed 
> language?
> Onece we builded high level language above assembler. Are we now building 
> another more high level? Will temlate will become another language used as 
> complete language? Will generic prigramming become mainstream, like high 
> level languages today?

It's really just another tool in the toolbox. Like OO.

And there's always more abstractions on top of abstractions: High-level 
langauges are an abstration on top of low-level. Low level programming is an 
abstration on top of digital hardware. Digital hardware is an abstraction on 
top of analog hardware. Analog hardware is an abstraction on top of 
chemistry. Chemistry is an abstration on top of natural observations of 
interacting with various materials. Observations are an abstraction on top 
of our perceptions of reality and sensory input.

First we discover useful things to do with one abstraction. Then we make use 
of that abstraction to the point where it starts to get complex. So we look 
for patterns in the complexity and use those patterns as the foundation for 
a new abstraction to make these complicated new things simple. And it starts 
again. Sending a link to a document across the world is trivial today, but 
it would be unthinkably complex without the abstractions of high level code, 
low level code, digital hardware, etc.