What you ignore is: "It was managed by an architecture astronaut that, as one is wont to do, rewrote existing mature libraries as header only template librarie

What you ignore is: "It was managed by an architecture astronaut that, as one is wont to do, rewrote existing mature libraries as header only template libraries that were buggy and untested (one could even say untestable)." I'd like here to quote this: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ricom/2007/02/08/performance-problems-survery-results/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/ricom/2007/02/08/performanc... "Which of the following is more likely the culprit of this crisis that has your boss in a panic: 1) A developer failed to code a good algorithm in some module and now a very smart person must come along and replace that module with something much better. 2) The project has far too many layers of abstraction and all that nice readable code turns out to be worthless crap that never had any hope of meeting the goals much less being worth maintaining over time." "Of 27 responses at this writing 8 didn't specify #1 or #2 at all or were balanced 4 went clearly for #1 15 went clearly for #2" I've had my own experiences of #2 on different occasions (I work for decades already).