[...] This is not nesserary good thing. I would prefer to be able to use imperetive style in metaprogramming.
Really? You would want mutable types? So suppose I define a class type, and then you use it in one place, and I redefine it later, and you use it again? Does the fact that the ODR is broken bother you?
If you want to fantasize that class definitions would be constants in such languadge, while templates would be 'variables'.
Toy is something kids play with, Tool is something adults use to do a real job. [...]
I think this is a pretty unprofessional way to make your point.
If you think so. I was just used analogies you introduced.
I didn't refer to anyone's work as a toy. Rather, I was making the claim that a paradigm was *not* a toy. That's neutral. Calling FC++ a toy, and then saying that "kids play with toys" implies that anyone who uses FC++ is "a kid". That's insulting. Or was that a backhanded compliment that I didn't understand?
Oh, well. I don't believe I have to excuse myself if you manage to dog something insulting in completely innocent statement, especially taken out of context. But just for the record, It should've mean in context where it was used: Toy (scientific project) is something kids (theorists) are play with (work on), Tool (reusable library) is something adults (c++ practitioners) use to do a real job (in production code). Gennadiy.