In article ,
(Deep Freud Moors) wrote:

Two days to "do" (gotta love the quotation marks - truly speaks
volumes!)
London?

David Horne's comments are wise IMHO. Isn't much of the problem here the
concept of "doing" places, as if it were not possible to get satisfaction
and enjoyment from only partially experiencing a city?

I've never been to Lille. For reasons unimportant to this discussion I
would very much like to visit that city's cathedral, though. So the chance
of, say, two or three hours there will appeal to me when it one day
arises. I won't claim to have "done", let alone to "know", the city; but
it won't have been wasted time.