>Walter, please, just read yourself and tell me what's "technical" about this:
>
>>The argument 'more control' on a lower level, is one of rubbish.
>So composability is rubbish. Good point.

Taken out of context. Again with assembly you've got ultimate control. We are talking about developping database applications where the level of control is inferiour to the level of productivity and flexibility within the borders of database application design.

>>You can't possibly expect for a single developper to write something on its own that internally is so complex.
>So no developers (does this include you?) can produce something complex...

Again, taken out of context. You can't expect a single developper to write a function to mimic the SQL-92 SELECT functionality, just as you can't expect a single developper to write an entire OS on its own. The development tool has to provide you with the small 'LEGO' building blocks to create a decent application. It should not be the task of a database developper to design the small LEGO blocks. He might be able to creat reusable components out of the small LEGO blocks for a specific implementation, but the small LEGO blocks that share functionality accross all flavours of database development SHOULD BE THERE ALREADY.

>>Whether you are agreeing on my viewpoint or not, it is the hard reality.
>This is called Solipsism, Walter. I though better of you, really.

I thought better of you, not taking the things out of context, and really challenge me on the technical details rather than reverting to generalisms and avoiding the hard questions.

Walter,