In your first post, everything is "linq is bad" in generic terms except for these two bits: > "it falls apart in real-world persistent code with considered alg

In your first post, everything is "linq is bad" in generic terms except for these two bits: > "it falls apart in real-world persistent code with considered algorithms and storage" > "it makes it so easy to do [grouping / sorting / etc] that developers start to resort to that as a catch-all magical solution that is costless because how much could a line or two of code cost" With hindsight I know your issue is with LINQ's deferred non-memoized execution. It's really easy to enumerate a sequence twice, but every place you do that might add a factor of 2 to the runtime and so there's a danger of exponential blowup that must be avoided. But that's not what I see when I read the above. The above reads as complaints about easy composability and worries about code monkeys failing to consider what the code they're writing will do. Those are standard "functional / high-level programming is bad" complaints. With hindsight I know that's not what you meant, but that's what it reads like.