Btw, why comment here and not on the post itself?

Hi Duckie,
I never mention that in the article because that claim, that LINQ wasn't meant to do parsing, is questionable - and that's the debate it was meant to provoke.
In fact, I had a dozen far more hideous and longer LINQ statements that query a DB and I didn't include them because I wanted a relatively simple statement that people could easily run on their machines.
These statements are in the "right context", as you define, but they're still complex statement that makes the code much harder to understand and maintain than it should be.

On the other, the programmer sitting next to me in the office (who wrote) sees nothing wrong with them...
I've also heard responses from other programmers that complain that Microsoft just put SQL into C# as a quick solution instead of working on good ORM solution that'll avoid dealing with anything DB (and SQL).

LINQ provokes all sort of opinions and responses from different programmers and the post's purpose was to get such a discussion going.
I think the comments I got are far more interesting than the actual post...

Regards,
Eran

New post at http://www.ekampf.com/blog/2008/03/24/DevelopingARobustDataDrivenUIUsingWPFTheDataModel.aspx

Hi,
Thanks for the comments, check out the summary at http://www.ekampf.com/blog/2007/07/15/WhatsWrongWithThisCode1Discussion.aspx

Regards,
Eran

DotNetKicks should add a "bury" button...

Thanks :)

I like .NET Framework 3.0 because thats what WinFX is...
I've been saying that WinFX is actually .NET 3.0 long before they actually renamed it and I dont understand why its a "confusing name"

Link changed from blog.ekampf.com to www.developerzen.com

Part 2 is also available for kicking.. check out http://www.dotnetkicks.com/tags/Interview