Deletion in History, look for:
20:35, 16 August 2011 Peter.alexander.au
"Removed the 'Templates in D' section entirely as it had nothing to do with generic programming. What does compile time factorial and C API wrappers have to do with generic programming? Templates and generic programming are not synonyms."
The rationale for deletion is actually here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Generic_programming#D
At the end:
"Does there have to be an exclamation point in factorial!(n-1)?"
I think that this should be considered otherwise any other author might see its paragraph on D deleted. The point is that the guy didn't get the exclamation mark is used to instantiate a template.
Comment #5 by dennis.m.ritchie — 2015-06-03T08:09:37Z
(In reply to bb.temp from comment #4)
> Deletion in History, look for:
>
> 20:35, 16 August 2011 Peter.alexander.au
>
> "Removed the 'Templates in D' section entirely as it had nothing to do with
> generic programming. What does compile time factorial and C API wrappers
> have to do with generic programming? Templates and generic programming are
> not synonyms."
>
> The rationale for deletion is actually here:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Generic_programming#D
>
> At the end:
>
> "Does there have to be an exclamation point in factorial!(n-1)?"
>
> I think that this should be considered otherwise any other author might see
> its paragraph on D deleted. The point is that the guy didn't get the
> exclamation mark is used to instantiate a template.
They want to see something new in generic programming, so show them the code generation mixins. If C++-programmers indicate "power" of its backward preprocessor: #define max(a, b) ((a) < (b) ? (b) : (a)), then why D-programmers can not describe the usefulness of mixins in generic programming.
Besides knocking the `static if` absolutely groundless.
Comment #6 by dlang-bugzilla — 2015-06-03T11:02:02Z