Anti-OOP... stupid?

[foobar]

On Wednesday, 15 February 2012 at 15:35:53 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
> On 02/15/2012 03:30 PM, foobar wrote:
>> ...
>> 1. D templates are an enhanced version of C++ templates which 
>> are a poor
>> design. The problem stems IMO not from issues with OOP but 
>> rather with
>> the horrible idea of C++-like templates. Other languages have 
>> *much*
>> better solutions which integrate better.
>>
>> [snip.]
>
> Please elaborate. What kind of construct in a language that 
> supports OO solves the same set of problems D templates do and 
> is unequivocally a better design?

Lisp/scheme macros come to mind :) There are no issues AFAIK 
integrating those with OOP, in fact the OOP features are 
implemented with macros (CLOS).