Meta programming concepts and metaphysics

Is this meta-programming confusing or I am just slow?

$as_echo "cross-compiling" >&6; }  # FIXME

else
  cat >conftest.$ac_ext <<_ACEOF
/* confdefs.h.  */
_ACEOF
cat confdefs.h >>conftest.$ac_ext
cat >>conftest.$ac_ext <<_ACEOF
/* end confdefs.h.  */

#include <boost/thread/thread.hpp>

int
main ()
{
boost::defer_lock_t(); return 0;
  ;
  return 0;
}
_ACEOF

It is possible to create a structure of meta programming and code reuse that becomes self supporting. The concept of boost is to reuse code and the concept of analysis of structure is intermingled here as I use this code to generate structure in the form of `graphviz` and then `povray` which in turn uses `boost`, which is analyzed and interlinked. to display it. Here I attempt to use the output to the structural analysis of code to reuse the code in a meta way. The degree of recursion is very complex, but this is not anywhere near as complex as the recursion and interaction which exists within the genotype expression of even the simplest single celled organism.

There are some things in the universe like conservation of momentum which are absolute necessities for understanding the coherent ontology of the universe. Recursion is right up there along with some other characteristics which defy simple explanation, like tendencies to specific attractors.

I can read this shell code, but does it need to be this confusing in representation. I would guess that `python` could be used here with some advantages in readability. I will have to Google and see if there is an alternative to configure in python. It does exist, but there is a better way to represent all of these complex ontologies. I am sure that the term ontology does not even touch the complexity of what all this represents. The relationships extend and expand exponentially and infinitely. It is much like classifying a concept as "all that other stuff."

It does seem to be a bounded and solvable ontology. From my experience with the puzzle game I can establish certain dimensions to the problem and it is very much like self-replicating and self-assembling forms as they interact to produce a result which is recursive and coherent. That higher dimensional association is not clear when viewed from a normal perspective and yet is more observable from other angles in different dimensions of thought. It may reduce the factorial exclusions that are necessary to the point where I can get a single coherence. At that point, I will have a new amplifier which can expand till the next barrier of recursion. I am afraid I must add more complexity to reduce it. It very much reminds me of organic synthesis of using Diels-Alder reagent. It was not always obvious what would happen, but trying several alternate methods would yield the desired result. I never told my lab instructor that I may have used some "tricks" I learned early in life doing qualitative and quantitative analysis.

I see some interesting things just beyond the veil of this complexity and perhaps this is what always drives me on. It is that new understanding of something never seen before. Like a jewel of knowledge of incomprehensible worth.