Why would I need to yell when senior people at MS have stated it will be a priority in LINQ. ;-) And various MVPs have hinted at VFP-like features under consideration for VB.NET. If you're completely happy with things as-is, that's fine.

John,

As a follow-up, a few weeks ago I asked for specifics on who these senior people are. Your initial reply was for me to "ask my co-author". That kind of reply tends to get people a little frosted, but I figured, fine...I asked him off-line. While I forget his exact words, he basically said he couldn't think of who you were referring to. Bottom line, it didn't bolster your case. Then you said it was YAG, and you referred me to a YAG post from early 2005, when MS was still putting ADO.NET 2.0 together. In that post, YAG said that 'auto-spanning' was a big personal goal.

So I'm sorry, but you still haven't answered my question on who these senior people are, who have stated it will be a priority in LINQ.

I don't know any other senior people at MS. However, I know other MVPs who talk regularly to the product teams. No one I've spoken to has any specific knowledge of auto-spanning - however, they are all in fundamental disagreement with approaches that need auto-spanning, even when I played devil's advocate.

If people indeed say they need it - OK. But I have yet to hear one person outside the confines of the UT/ProFox advocate it.

I am neutral on the subject of auto-spanning. If it makes it in, great (so long as the implementation does not yield behavior that sets back other functionality or performance in the CLR).

So once again, who are these senior people at MS who are saying it will be a priority in LINQ???

Kevin