You are describing a compiler, not code generation as I am criticizing. When people generate code, the generated code is the code they check in and modify going forward, not just some intermediate step in a language implementation.

There's a misunderstanding, generated code is only "modified going forward" by very immature organizations. For extra negative credits there is the false idol of "round-trip engineering", like in the old Together Control Center, usually involving UML.

Generating from nice models and nice templates (the real source code) verbose and correct "boilerplate" that won't be usually read, let alone modified, is simply a shift to an ad hoc, specialized programming language.

You were critical of this tool. I could easily see this tool being used for my use case. It generates human readable c which I can exactly what I want and is not what compilers do.

Who says you have to check the generated code in and modify it going forward?

You're commenting on your own definition of 'code generator' without properly considering this tool and its use cases.

So you're criticising templating languages now. No point in engaging further. Bye.

Well, I use templating languages and I think they are quite useful. I've used many in my career, probably 10 or more. Now there is another one, which is good to know I guess.