I have 2 List classes below,
public class OldList
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int Size { get; set; }
}
public class NewList
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int Size { get; set; }
}
Now I have data from 2 class likes,
var oldList = new List<OldList> {
new OldList { Name = "F1", Size = 374 },
new OldList { Name = "F2", Size = 125 }
};
var newList = new List<NewList> {
new NewList { Name = "F1", Size = 374, },
new NewList { Name = "F2", Size = 126, },
new NewList { Name = "F3", Size = 13, }
};
I would like to filter newList to retrieve all new items (e.g. "F3") and also all existing items where Size of newList is greater than Size of OldList (e.g. "F2").
For "F1" the Size is the same, hence I want to ignore.
Below code gave me result "F3", how to also get "F2"?
var X = newList.Where(p => !oldList.Any(l => p.Name == l.Name));
You can add an additional condition for "same name, increased size" into the .Where statement, like this:
var X = newList.Where(
p => !oldList.Any(l => p.Name == l.Name)
|| oldList.Any(l => p.Name == l.Name && p.Size > l.Size)
);
Try this?
var result = newList.Where(i => !oldList.Any(l => i.Name == l.Name)
|| i.Size > oldList.Where(x => x.Name == i.Name).Select(x => x.Size).Max());
Note: performance of this won't be great and this may not translate to SQL if you're using ORM.
Related
The best way I can describe what I'm trying to do is "Nested DistinctBy".
Let's say I have a collection of objects. Each object contains a collection of nicknames.
class Person
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int Priority { get; set; }
public string[] Nicknames { get; set; }
}
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
var People = new List<Person>
{
new Person { Name = "Steve", Priority = 4, Nicknames = new string[] { "Stevo", "Lefty", "Slim" }},
new Person { Name = "Karen", Priority = 6, Nicknames = new string[] { "Kary", "Birdie", "Snookie" }},
new Person { Name = "Molly", Priority = 3, Nicknames = new string[] { "Mol", "Lefty", "Dixie" }},
new Person { Name = "Greg", Priority = 5, Nicknames = new string[] { "G-man", "Chubs", "Skippy" }}
};
}
}
I want to select all Persons but make sure nobody selected shares a nickname with another. Molly and Steve both share the nickname 'Lefty' so I want to filter one of them out. Only the one with highest priority should be included. If there is a highest priority tie between 2 or more then just pick the first one of them. So in this example I would want an IEnumerable of all people except Steve.
EDIT: Here's another example using music album instead of person, might make more sense.
class Album
{
string Name {get; set;}
int Priority {get;set;}
string[] Aliases {get; set;}
{
class Program
{
var NeilYoungAlbums = new List<Album>
{
new Person{ Name = "Harvest (Remastered)", Priority = 4, Aliases = new string[] { "Harvest (1972)", "Harvest (2012)"}},
new Person{ Name = "On The Beach", Priority = 6, Aliases = new string[] { "The Beach Album", "On The Beach (1974)"}},
new Person{ Name = "Harvest", Priority = 3, Aliases = new string[] { "Harvest (1972)"}},
new Person{ Name = "Freedom", Priority = 5, Aliases = new string[] { "Freedom (1989)"}}
};
}
The idea here is we want to show his discography but we want to skip quasi-duplicates.
I would solve this using a custom IEqualityComparer<T>:
class Person
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int Priority { get; set; }
public string[] Nicknames { get; set; }
}
class PersonEqualityComparer : IEqualityComparer<Person>
{
public bool Equals(Person x, Person y)
{
if (x == null || y == null) return false;
return x.Nicknames.Any(i => y.Nicknames.Any(j => i == j));
}
// This is bad for performance, but if performance is not a
// concern, it allows for more readability of the LINQ below
// However you should check the Edit, if you want a truely
// LINQ only solution, without a wonky implementation of GetHashCode
public int GetHashCode(Person obj) => 0;
}
// ...
var people = new List<Person>
{
new Person { Name = "Steve", Priority = 4, Nicknames = new[] { "Stevo", "Lefty", "Slim" } },
new Person { Name = "Karen", Priority = 6, Nicknames = new[] { "Kary", "Birdie", "Snookie" } },
new Person { Name = "Molly", Priority = 3, Nicknames = new[] { "Mol", "Lefty", "Dixie" } },
new Person { Name = "Greg", Priority = 5, Nicknames = new[] { "G-man", "Chubs", "Skippy" } }
};
var distinctPeople = people.OrderBy(i => i.Priority).Distinct(new PersonEqualityComparer());
EDIT:
Just for completeness, this could be a possible LINQ only approach:
var personNicknames = people.SelectMany(person => person.Nicknames
.Select(nickname => new { person, nickname }));
var groupedPersonNicknames = personNicknames.GroupBy(i => i.nickname);
var duplicatePeople = groupedPersonNicknames.SelectMany(i =>
i.OrderBy(j => j.person.Priority)
.Skip(1).Select(j => j.person)
);
var distinctPeople = people.Except(duplicatePeople);
A LINQ-only solution
var dupeQuery = people
.SelectMany( p => p.Nicknames.Select( n => new { Nickname = n, Person = p } ) )
.ToLookup( e => e.Nickname, e => e.Person )
.SelectMany( e => e.OrderBy( p => p.Priority ).Skip( 1 ) );
var result = people.Except( dupeQuery ).ToList();
See .net fiddle sample
This works once, then you have to clear the set. Or store the results in a collection.
var uniqueNicknames = new HashSet<string>();
IEnumerable<Person> uniquePeople = people
.OrderBy(T => T.Priority) // ByDescending?
.Where(T => T.Nicknames.All(N => !uniqueNicknames.Contains(N)))
.Where(T => T.Nicknames.All(N => uniqueNicknames.Add(N)));
I am a newbie of c #, I would like to know if I can remove the for each and do a single operation with Linq. I would like to return an IEnumerable with already filtered. is it possible to do this? Every suggestion is welcome, thank you very much
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
namespace Linq
{
class Oggetto
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string MyProperty { get; set; }
public int Deleted { get; set; }
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
IEnumerable<Oggetto> lista = new List<Oggetto> {
new Oggetto(){ Id = 1, MyProperty = "Propr1", Deleted = 0 },
new Oggetto(){ Id = 1, MyProperty = "Propr2", Deleted = 1 },
new Oggetto(){ Id = 2, MyProperty = "Prop3", Deleted = 0 },
new Oggetto(){ Id = 3, MyProperty = "Propr4", Deleted = 0 },
new Oggetto(){ Id = 3, MyProperty = "Prop5", Deleted = 1 }
};
foreach (var item in lista.Where(x => x.Deleted == 1).GroupBy(x => x.Id).Select(g => g.First()))
{
item.MyProperty = string.Join(",", lista.Where(t => t.Id == item.Id).Select(x => x.MyProperty).ToArray());
Console.WriteLine(item.Id);
Console.WriteLine(item.MyProperty);
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
}
You can use projection for this.
var orderedList = lista.GroupBy(x => x.Id)
.Where(x => x.Any(y => y.Deleted == 1))
.Select(x => new Oggetto
{
Id = x.Key, MyProperty = string.Join(",", x.Select(v => v.MyProperty))
});
foreach (var item in orderedList)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.Id);
Console.WriteLine(item.MyProperty);
}
Anyway, as #Alex said you shoud replace Deleted field type to bool and as said by #Marco Salerno start programming in English you'll not regret.
First of all I would avoid the groupBy statement. This is a lot of unneded overhead. You can use distinct instead. This will give you all the IDs you need to know.
var ids = lista.Where(x => x.Deleted).Select(x => x.Id).Distinct();
You can then select all the elements that you need with:
var items = ids.Select(i => lista.Where(x => x.Id == i));
which results in a List of Lists. For the ease of use I would convert this to a Dictionary<K, V> (int this case it's Dictionary<long, List<string>> as a final step:
var dictionary = items.ToDictionary(l => l.First().Id, l => l.Select(o => o.MyProperty).ToList());
You now got a "nice and filtered" collection you can use any way you like (or just output it)
foreach (var item in dictionary)
{
Console.WriteLine($"Id: {item.Key}");
Console.WriteLine($"Properties: {string.Join(", ", item.Value)}");
}
I also changed your class a little bit to:
class Oggetto
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string MyProperty { get; set; }
// bool instead of int - Deleted has only 2 states
public bool Deleted { get; set; }
}
First of all STOP programming in Italian, start doing it in English.
Anyway, this should be a better approach:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<Item> items = new List<Item> {
new Item{ Id = 1, MyProperty = "Propr1", Deleted = 0 },
new Item{ Id = 1, MyProperty = "Propr2", Deleted = 1 },
new Item{ Id = 2, MyProperty = "Prop3", Deleted = 0 },
new Item{ Id = 3, MyProperty = "Propr4", Deleted = 0 },
new Item{ Id = 3, MyProperty = "Prop5", Deleted = 1}
};
foreach (IGrouping<int,Item> group in items.GroupBy(x => x.Id).ToList())
{
List<Item> groupItems = group.ToList();
Item deletedItem = groupItems.Where(x => x.Deleted == 1).FirstOrDefault();
if(deletedItem != null)
{
deletedItem.MyProperty = string.Join(",", groupItems.Select(x => x.MyProperty).ToArray());
Console.WriteLine(deletedItem.Id);
Console.WriteLine(deletedItem.MyProperty);
}
}
}
}
class Item
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string MyProperty { get; set; }
public int Deleted { get; set; }
}
I'm just wondering if there's a better way to write this code, basically the source object contains a mix of items with a boolean property however the destination object has two lists which should contain the true/false items independently.
I've written it in Linq and it works just fine but it feels as though there's a better way. Any suggestions?
void Main()
{
var s = new ResponseObject()
{
Results = new List<GroupedObject>()
{
new GroupedObject()
{
Name = "List A",
List=new List<DetailObject>()
{
new DetailObject{ Name = "Allowed", AllowedAccess = true},
new DetailObject{ Name = "Restricted", AllowedAccess = false}
}
},
new GroupedObject()
{
Name = "List B",
List=new List<DetailObject>()
{
new DetailObject{ Name = "Allowed", AllowedAccess = true},
new DetailObject{ Name = "Restricted", AllowedAccess = false}
}
}
}
};
var d = new ResponseViewModel();
d.AllowedResults = FilterObjectsByAccess(s.Results, true);
d.RestrictedResults = FilterObjectsByAccess(s.Results, false);
// Other stuff
}
public IEnumerable<GroupedObject> FilterObjectsByAccess(IEnumerable<GroupedObject> source, bool allowAccess)
{
return source.Where(i => i.List.Any(c => c.AllowedAccess == allowAccess))
.Select(i => new GroupedObject()
{
Name = i.Name,
List = i.List.Where(c => c.AllowedAccess == allowAccess)
});
}
public class ResponseObject
{
public IEnumerable<GroupedObject> Results { get; set; }
}
public class ResponseViewModel
{
public IEnumerable<GroupedObject> AllowedResults { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<GroupedObject> RestrictedResults { get; set; }
}
public class GroupedObject
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<DetailObject> List { get; set; }
}
public class DetailObject
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public bool AllowedAccess { get; set; }
}
One change that may be worth benchmarking would be changing:
public IEnumerable<GroupedObject> FilterObjectsByAccess(IEnumerable<GroupedObject> source, bool allowAccess)
{
return source.Where(i => i.List.Any(c => c.AllowedAccess == allowAccess))
.Select(i => new GroupedObject()
{
Name = i.Name,
List = i.List.Where(c => c.AllowedAccess == allowAccess)
});
}
to:
public IEnumerable<GroupedObject> FilterObjectsByAccess(IEnumerable<GroupedObject> source, bool allowAccess)
{
return source
.Select(i => new GroupedObject()
{
Name = i.Name,
List = i.List.Where(c => c.AllowedAccess == allowAccess).ToList() // `ToList` here is optional - it is a trade-off between RAM and CPU
})
.Where(z => z.List.Any());
}
Your original code, with the use of Any then Where would enumerate i.List twice. The above change would likely improve that.
Another approach, which would likely involve even higher memory consumption could be to switch to using ToLookup:
var d = new ResponseViewModel
{
AllowedResults =
FilterObjectsByAccess(s.Results)
.Select(z => new GroupedObject() { Name = z.Name, List = z.GroupedList[false] })
.Where(z => z.List.Any()),
RestrictedResults =
FilterObjectsByAccess(s.Results)
.Select(z => new GroupedObject() { Name = z.Name, List = z.GroupedList[true] })
.Where(z => z.List.Any())
};
// Other stuff
}
public List<SpecialGroupedObject> FilterObjectsByAccess(IEnumerable<GroupedObject> source)
{
return source.Select(i => new SpecialGroupedObject()
{
Name = i.Name,
GroupedList = i.List.ToLookup(c => c.AllowedAccess)
}).ToList();
}
I can suggest you to use ToDictionary() like this:
var result = new[] {true, false}.ToDictionary(k => k,
v =>
s.Results.Where(w => w.List.Any(x => x.AllowedAccess == v))
.Select(c => new GroupedObject {Name = c.Name, List = c.List.Where(l => l.AllowedAccess == v)}));
var allowedResults = result[true];
var restrictedResults = result[false];
Or this:
var result = s.Results
.SelectMany(c => c.List, (b, c) => new {b.Name, DObj = c})
.GroupBy(g => g.DObj.AllowedAccess)
.ToDictionary(k=> k.Key,
c =>
new {
c.Key,
List =
c.GroupBy(cg => cg.Name)
.Select(
x => new GroupedObject {Name = x.Key, List = x.Select(l => l.DObj).ToList()})
.ToList()
});
This may be a bit of a dumb question but I'm new to elastic search and nest.
I have a class
Person
{
public string Id {get; set;}
public string Name {get; set;}
public IList<string> PhoneNumbers {get; set;}
}
And what I want to do is update the Phone number by adding to it.
Right now I'm doing it with 2 queries but I'm wondering if there is a way I could manage it with 1.
// See if the Person already exists
var result = NestClient.Search<Person>(s => s
.Index(_indexName)
.Take(1)
.Query(q => q
.Term(p => p.Name, person.Name)
&& q.Term(p => p.Id, person.Id)));
if (result.ServerError != null)
{
throw result.OriginalException;
}
if (result.Documents.FirstOrDefault() == null)
{
var response = NestClient.Index<Person>(person);
if (response.ServerError != null)
{
throw response.OriginalException;
}
}
else
{
// If it does exist update and overwrite
var savedPerson = result.Documents.First();
IList<string> oldNums = SavedPerson.PhoneNumbers;
IList<string> newNums = newPerson.PhoneNumbers;
var combinedNums = oldNums.Concat(newNums);
newPerson.PhoneNumbers = combinedNums.ToList<string>();
var response = NestClient.Update(DocumentPath<Person>
.Id(newPerson.Id),
u => u.Doc(newPerson).DocAsUpsert(true));
if (response.ServerError != null)
{
throw response.OriginalException;
}
}
Basically I want my upsert to add to the existing list of phone numbers if it exists.
If script is an option you can do this with scripted update.
Option with duplicated items after update in array
var updateResponse = client.Update<Document, DocumentPartial>(DocumentPath<Document>.Id(1), descriptor => descriptor
.Script(#"ctx._source.array += tab;")
.Params(p => p.Add("tab", new[] {4, 5, 3})));
and without
var updateResponse = client.Update<Document, DocumentPartial>(DocumentPath<Document>.Id(1), descriptor => descriptor
.Script(#"ctx._source.array += tab; ctx._source.array.unique();")
.Params(p => p.Add("tab", new[] {4, 5, 3})));
Full example:
public class DocumentPartial
{
public int[] Array { get; set; }
}
public class Document
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public int[] Array { get; set; }
}
var client = new ElasticClient(settings);
client.CreateIndex(indexName, descriptor => descriptor
.Mappings(map => map
.Map<Document>(m => m.AutoMap())));
var items = new List<Document>
{
new Document
{
Id = 1,
Array = new[] {1,2,3}
}
};
var bulkResponse = client.IndexMany(items);
client.Refresh(indexName);
var updateResponse = client.Update<Document, DocumentPartial>(DocumentPath<Document>.Id(1), descriptor => descriptor
.Script(#"ctx._source.array += tab; ctx._source.array.unique();")
.Params(p => p.Add("tab", new[] {4, 5, 3})));
Hope it helps.
How can I group by with multiple columns using lambda?
I saw examples of how to do it using linq to entities, but I am looking for lambda form.
var query = source.GroupBy(x => new { x.Column1, x.Column2 });
I came up with a mix of defining a class like David's answer, but not requiring a Where class to go with it. It looks something like:
var resultsGroupings = resultsRecords.GroupBy(r => new { r.IdObj1, r.IdObj2, r.IdObj3})
.Select(r => new ResultGrouping {
IdObj1= r.Key.IdObj1,
IdObj2= r.Key.IdObj2,
IdObj3= r.Key.IdObj3,
Results = r.ToArray(),
Count = r.Count()
});
private class ResultGrouping
{
public short IdObj1{ get; set; }
public short IdObj2{ get; set; }
public int IdObj3{ get; set; }
public ResultCsvImport[] Results { get; set; }
public int Count { get; set; }
}
Where resultRecords is my initial list I'm grouping, and its a List<ResultCsvImport>. Note that the idea here to is that, I'm grouping by 3 columns, IdObj1 and IdObj2 and IdObj3
if your table is like this
rowId col1 col2 col3 col4
1 a e 12 2
2 b f 42 5
3 a e 32 2
4 b f 44 5
var grouped = myTable.AsEnumerable().GroupBy(r=> new {pp1 = r.Field<int>("col1"), pp2 = r.Field<int>("col2")});
Further to aduchis answer above - if you then need to filter based on those group by keys, you can define a class to wrap the many keys.
return customers.GroupBy(a => new CustomerGroupingKey(a.Country, a.Gender))
.Where(a => a.Key.Country == "Ireland" && a.Key.Gender == "M")
.SelectMany(a => a)
.ToList();
Where CustomerGroupingKey takes the group keys:
private class CustomerGroupingKey
{
public CustomerGroupingKey(string country, string gender)
{
Country = country;
Gender = gender;
}
public string Country { get; }
public string Gender { get; }
}
class Element
{
public string Company;
public string TypeOfInvestment;
public decimal Worth;
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<Element> elements = new List<Element>()
{
new Element { Company = "JPMORGAN CHASE",TypeOfInvestment = "Stocks", Worth = 96983 },
new Element { Company = "AMER TOWER CORP",TypeOfInvestment = "Securities", Worth = 17141 },
new Element { Company = "ORACLE CORP",TypeOfInvestment = "Assets", Worth = 59372 },
new Element { Company = "PEPSICO INC",TypeOfInvestment = "Assets", Worth = 26516 },
new Element { Company = "PROCTER & GAMBL",TypeOfInvestment = "Stocks", Worth = 387050 },
new Element { Company = "QUASLCOMM INC",TypeOfInvestment = "Bonds", Worth = 196811 },
new Element { Company = "UTD TECHS CORP",TypeOfInvestment = "Bonds", Worth = 257429 },
new Element { Company = "WELLS FARGO-NEW",TypeOfInvestment = "Bank Account", Worth = 106600 },
new Element { Company = "FEDEX CORP",TypeOfInvestment = "Stocks", Worth = 103955 },
new Element { Company = "CVS CAREMARK CP",TypeOfInvestment = "Securities", Worth = 171048 },
};
//Group by on multiple column in LINQ (Query Method)
var query = from e in elements
group e by new{e.TypeOfInvestment,e.Company} into eg
select new {eg.Key.TypeOfInvestment, eg.Key.Company, Points = eg.Sum(rl => rl.Worth)};
foreach (var item in query)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.TypeOfInvestment.PadRight(20) + " " + item.Points.ToString());
}
//Group by on multiple column in LINQ (Lambda Method)
var CompanyDetails =elements.GroupBy(s => new { s.Company, s.TypeOfInvestment})
.Select(g =>
new
{
company = g.Key.Company,
TypeOfInvestment = g.Key.TypeOfInvestment,
Balance = g.Sum(x => Math.Round(Convert.ToDecimal(x.Worth), 2)),
}
);
foreach (var item in CompanyDetails)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.TypeOfInvestment.PadRight(20) + " " + item.Balance.ToString());
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}