Alexandrescu’s TMP techniques (not “designs”) are very tricky (not “complex”). They require absorbency, but do they enhance latency? Do they get you higher jobs with lower stress?
I need to make time-allocation decisions among QQ topics, including TMP
In terms of latency, Well, java can now rival c++ in latency. The technical reasons are not obvious nor intuitive, but not my focus today. Just an observed fact which discredits conventional wisdom and our assumptions.
— zbs, based on continued
TMP is needed when reaching next level in c++ zbs.
TMP is more time-honored than many c++0x features.
Many new c++0x features were added for TMP. I feel TMP is the main innovation front across c++ language n standard development. C++ lost many battles in the language war but no other languages offer anything close to TMP features.
— As QQ
Will C++TMP (and rvr) QQ turn out similar to java bytecode engineering, reflection, generics? (Even in such a scenario, TMP still offers better roti than Qz.) Actually TMP is quizzed more than those. The c++ guru interviewers often adore TMP.. cult following.
EJB is an add-on package .. different category, not an advanced core language feature.
When TMP is not quizzed you may still get opportunities to showcase your halo. Many interviewers ask open-ended questions.
TMP techniques would remain a halo for years to come. Classic QQ topic.
— GTD: templates are never needed in greenfield projects. Occasionally relevant in understanding existing code base such as etsflow, STL, boost..
Q: are there rare projects using TMP and offer me an opportunity to outshine others, gain GTD advantage ..?
A: I guess it’s one in 10 or 20. Here are some factors:
Within a given project codebase, TMP is a powerful tool for DRY improvement and re-usability , but such reusability is over-rated in most projects.
DRY (don’t repeat yourself) is practiced more widely, but I feel TMP techniques replace 100 lines of code duplication with 20 lines of unreadable code.