Develop Reference

Property or indexer 'string.this[int]' cannot be assigned to -- it's read only

I didn't get the problem - I was trying to do a simple action:
for(i = x.Length-1, j = 0 ; i >= 0 ; i--, j++)
{
backx[j] = x[i];
}
Both are declared:
String x;
String backx;
What is the problem ? It says the error in the title...
If there is a problem - is there another way to do that?
The result (As the name 'backx' hints) is that backx will contain the string X backwards.
P.S. x is not empty - it contains a substring from another string.

Strings are immutable: you can retrieve the character at a certain position, but you cannot change the character to a new one directly.
Instead you'll have to build a new string with the change. There are several ways to do this, but StringBuilder does the job in a similar fashion to what you already have:
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(backx);
sb[j] = x[i];
backx = sb.ToString();
EDIT: If you take a look at the string public facing API, you'll see this indexer:
public char this[int index] { get; }
This shows that you can "get" a value, but because no "set" is available, you cannot assign values to that indexer.
EDITx2: If you're looking for a way to reverse a string, there are a few different ways, but here's one example with an explanation as to how it works: http://www.dotnetperls.com/reverse-string

String is immutable in .NET - this is why you get the error.
You can get a reverse string with LINQ:
string x = "abcd";
string backx = new string(x.Reverse().ToArray());
Console.WriteLine(backx); // output: "dcba"

String are immuatable. You have convert to Char Array and then you would be able to modify.
Or you can use StringBuilder.
for example
char[] wordArray = word.ToCharArray();

In C# strings are immutable. You cannot "set" Xth character to whatever you want. If yo uwant to construct a new string, or be able to "edit" a string, use i.e. StringBuilder class.

Strings are immutable in C#. You can read more about it here: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/362314fe.aspx

Both the variables you have are string while you are treating them as if they were arrays (well, they are). Of course it is a valid statement to access characters from a string through this mechanism, you cannot really assign it that way.
Since you are trying to reverse a string, do take a look at this post. It has lot of information.

public static string ReverseName( string theName)
{
string revName = string.Empty;
foreach (char a in theName)
{
revName = a + revName;
}
return revName;
}
This is simple and does not involve arrays directly.

The code below simply swaps the index of each char in the string which enables you to only have to iterate half way through the original string which is pretty efficient if you're dealing with a lot of characters. The result is the original string reversed. I tested this with a string consisting of 100 characters and it executed in 0.0000021 seconds.
private string ReverseString(string testString)
{
int j = testString.Length - 1;
char[] charArray = new char[testString.Length];
for (int i = 0; i <= j; i++)
{
if (i != j)
{
charArray[i] = testString[j];
charArray[j] = testString[i];
}
j--;
}
return new string(charArray);
}

In case you need to replace e.g. index 2 in string use this (it is ugly, but working and is easily maintainbable)
V1 - you know what you want to put their. Here you saying in pseudocode string[2] = 'R';
row3String.Replace(row3String[2], 'R');
V2 - you need to put their char R or char Y. Here string[2] = 'R' if was 'Y' or if was not stay 'Y' (this one line if needs some form of else)
row3String.Replace(row3String[2], row3String[2].Equals('Y') ? 'R' : 'Y');

C#: Get an integer representation of a string array

I am new to C# and I ran into the following problem (I have looked for a solution here and on google but was not successful):
Given an array of strings (some columns can possibly be doubles or integers "in string format") I would like to convert this array to an integer array.
The question only concerns the columns with actual string values (say a list of countries).
Now I believe a Dictionary can help me to identify the unique values in a given column and associate an integer number to every country that appears.
Then to create my new array which should be of type int (or double) I could loop through the whole array and define the new array via the dictionary. This I would need to do for every column which has string values.
This seems inefficient, is there a better way?
In the end I would like to do multiple linear regression (or even fit a generalized linear model, meaning I want to get a design matrix eventually) with the data.
EDIT:
1) Sorry for being unclear, I will try to clarify:
Given:
MAKE;VALUE ;GENDER
AUDI;40912.2;m
WV;3332;f
AUDI;1234.99;m
DACIA;0;m
AUDI;12354.2;m
AUDI;123;m
VW;21321.2;f
I want to get a "numerical" matrix with identifiers for the the string valued columns
MAKE;VALUE;GENDER
1;40912.2;0
2;3332;1
1;1234.99;0
3;0;0
1;12354.2;0
1;123;0
2;21321.2;1
2) I think this is actually not what I need to solve my problem. Still it does seem like an interesting question.
3) Thank you for the responses so far.

This will take all the possible strings which represent an integer and puts them in a List.
You can do the same with strings wich represent a double.
Is this what you mean??
List<int> myIntList = new List<int>()
foreach(string value in stringArray)
{
int myInt;
if(Int.TryParse(value,out myInt)
{
myIntList.Add(myInt);
}
}
Dictionary is good if you want to map each string to a key like this:
var myDictionary = new Dictionary<int,string>();
myDictionary.Add(1,"CountryOne");
myDictionary.Add(2,"CountryTwo");
myDictionary.Add(3,"CountryThree");
Then you can get your values like:
string myCountry = myDictionary[2];
But still not sure if i'm helping you right now. Do you have som code to specify what you mean?

I'm not sure if this is what you are looking for but it does output the result you are looking for, from which you can create an appropriate data structure to use. I use a list of string but you can use something else to hold the processed data. I can expand further, if needed.
It does assume that the number of "columns", based on the semicolon character, is equal throughout the data and is flexible enough to handle any number of columns. Its kind of ugly but it should get what you want.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
namespace ConsoleApplication3
{
class StringColIndex
{
public int ColIndex { get; set; }
public List<string> StringValues {get;set;}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var StringRepresentationAsInt = new List<StringColIndex>();
List<string> rawDataList = new List<string>();
List<string> rawDataWithStringsAsIdsList = new List<string>();
rawDataList.Add("AUDI;40912.2;m");rawDataList.Add("VW;3332;f ");
rawDataList.Add("AUDI;1234.99;m");rawDataList.Add("DACIA;0;m");
rawDataList.Add("AUDI;12354.2;m");rawDataList.Add("AUDI;123;m");
rawDataList.Add("VW;21321.2;f ");
foreach(var rawData in rawDataList)
{
var split = rawData.Split(';');
var line = string.Empty;
for(int i= 0; i < split.Length; i++)
{
double outValue;
var isNumberic = Double.TryParse(split[i], out outValue);
var txt = split[i];
if (!isNumberic)
{
if(StringRepresentationAsInt
.Where(x => x.ColIndex == i).Count() == 0)
{
StringRepresentationAsInt.Add(
new StringColIndex { ColIndex = i,
StringValues = new List<string> { txt } });
}
var obj = StringRepresentationAsInt
.First(x => x.ColIndex == i);
if (!obj.StringValues.Contains(txt)){
obj.StringValues.Add(txt);
}
line += (string.IsNullOrEmpty(line) ?
string.Empty :
("," + (obj.StringValues.IndexOf(txt) + 1).ToString()));
}
else
{
line += "," + split[i];
}
}
rawDataWithStringsAsIdsList.Add(line);
}
rawDataWithStringsAsIdsList.ForEach(x => Console.WriteLine(x));
Console.ReadLine();
/*
Desired output:
1;40912.2;0
2;3332;1
1;1234.99;0
3;0;0
1;12354.2;0
1;123;0
2;21321.2;1
*/
}
}
}

Shove a delimited string into a List<int>

If I have for example the following string:
"123;3344;4334;12"
and I want these numbers in a generic List<int>, I guess I don't know of a good way here other than to split in a loop and do a conversion then add to a List<int> through each iteration. Does anyone have other ways to go about this?
Updated. Here's what I came up with. I want to do this the old fashion way, not with LINQ because I'm trying to get better with just strings, arrays, lists and manipulating and converting in general.
public List<int> StringToList(string stringToSplit, char splitDelimiter)
{
List<int> list = new List<int>();
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(stringToSplit))
return list;
string[] values = stringToSplit.Split(splitDelimiter);
if (values.Length <= 1)
return list;
foreach (string s in values)
{
int i;
if (Int32.TryParse(s, out i))
list.Add(i);
}
return list;
}
This is a new string utility method I plan on using whenever I need to convert a delimited string list to List
So I'm returning an empty list back to the caller if something fails. Good/Bad? is it pretty common to do this?
Yes, there are more "elegant" ways to do this with LINQ but I want to do it manually..the old way for now just for my own understanding.
Also, what bothers me about this:
list.AddRange(str.Split(';').Select(Int32.Parse));
is that I have no idea:
How to shove in a TryParse there instead.
What if the str.Split(';').Select(Int32.Parse) just fails for whatever reason...then the method that this AddRange resides in is going to blow up and unless I add a try/catch around this whole thing, I'm screwed if I don't handle it properly.

static int? ToInt32OrNull(string s)
{
int value;
return (Int32.TryParse(s, out value)) ? value : default(int?);
}
// ...
var str = "123;3344;4334;12";
var list = new List<int>();
list.AddRange(str.Split(';')
.Select(ToInt32OrNull)
.Where(i => i != null)
.Cast<int>());
Questioner notes:
I don't know of a good way here other than to split in a loop and do a conversion then add to a List
In general, this is a major reason why LINQ was brought into C# - to remove the need to work with sequences of values by implementing loops, and instead just declare your intention to transform the sequence. If you ever find yourself thinking "I don't know how to do this except with a loop" - it's time to look into a LINQ construct which will do the work for you.
Performance Update:
Performance of LINQ has been quesioned below. While in the comments the idea of LINQ being slower is defended since we gain the benefits of readability, maintainability and composibility, there is another aspect which gives LINQ an easy performance advantage: parallelism. Here is an example where adding just one extension method call, AsParallel() doubles the performance. This is a great example of where scale-out beats micro-optimization without even needing to measure very carefully. Note I'm not claiming that micro-optimizations are not ever needed, but with the tools we have available at this level of absraction, the need becomes vanishingly small.
class Program
{
private const int ElementCount = 10000000;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var str = generateString();
var stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
var list1 = new List<int>(ElementCount);
var list2 = new List<int>(ElementCount);
var split = str.Split(';');
stopwatch.Start();
list1.AddRange(split
.Select(ToInt32OrNull)
.Where(i => i != null)
.Cast<int>());
stopwatch.Stop();
TimeSpan nonParallel = stopwatch.Elapsed;
stopwatch.Restart();
list2.AddRange(split
.AsParallel()
.Select(ToInt32OrNull)
.Where(i => i != null)
.Cast<int>());
stopwatch.Stop();
TimeSpan parallel = stopwatch.Elapsed;
Debug.WriteLine("Non-parallel: {0}", nonParallel);
Debug.WriteLine("Parallel: {0}", parallel);
}
private static String generateString()
{
var builder = new StringBuilder(1048576);
var rnd = new Random();
for (int i = 0; i < ElementCount; i++)
{
builder.Append(rnd.Next(99999));
builder.Append(';');
}
builder.Length--;
return builder.ToString();
}
static int? ToInt32OrNull(string s)
{
int value;
return (Int32.TryParse(s, out value)) ? value : default(int?);
}
}
Non-parallel: 00:00:07.0719911
Parallel: 00:00:04.5933906

string str = "123;3344;4334;12";
List<int> list = new List<int>();
foreach (string s in str.Split(';'))
{
list.Add( Int32.Parse(s));
}

List<int> list = (from numString in "123;3344;4334;12".Split(';')
select int.Parse(numString)).ToList();

string myString = "123;3344;4334;12";
var ints = new List<int>();
(from s in myString.Split(';')
select int.Parse()).ToList().ForEach(i=>ints.Add(i));
I've heard .Net 4.0 may have added ForEach to Enumerable<T>, so the ToList might be unnecessary there (can't test).

I think this is simplest
var str = "123;3344;4334;12";
var list = str.Split(';').ToList().Cast<int>();

String Parsing in C#

What is the most efficient way to parse a C# string in the form of
"(params (abc 1.3)(sdc 2.0)(www 3.05)....)"
into a struct in the form
struct Params
{
double abc,sdc,www....;
}
Thanks
EDIT
The structure always have the same parameters (same names,only doubles, known at compile time).. but the order is not granted.. only one struct at a time..

using System;
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
struct Params
{
public double abc, sdc;
};
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string s = "(params (abc 1.3)(sdc 2.0))";
Params p = new Params();
object pbox = (object)p; // structs must be boxed for SetValue() to work
string[] arr = s.Substring(8).Replace(")", "").Split(new char[] { ' ', '(', }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);
for (int i = 0; i < arr.Length; i+=2)
typeof(Params).GetField(arr[i]).SetValue(pbox, double.Parse(arr[i + 1]));
p = (Params)pbox;
Console.WriteLine("p.abc={0} p.sdc={1}", p.abc, p.sdc);
}
}
}
Note: if you used a class instead of a struct the boxing/unboxing would not be necessary.

Depending on your complete grammar you have a few options:
if it's a very simple grammar and you don't have to test for errors in it you could simply go with the below (which will be fast)
var input = "(params (abc 1.3)(sdc 2.0)(www 3.05)....)";
var tokens = input.Split('(');
var typeName = tokens[0];
//you'll need more than the type name (assembly/namespace) so I'll leave that to you
Type t = getStructFromType(typeName);
var obj = TypeDescriptor.CreateInstance(null, t, null, null);
for(var i = 1;i<tokens.Length;i++)
{
var innerTokens = tokens[i].Trim(' ', ')').Split(' ');
var fieldName = innerTokens[0];
var value = Convert.ToDouble(innerTokens[1]);
var field = t.GetField(fieldName);
field.SetValue(obj, value);
}
that simple approach however requires a well conforming string or it will misbehave.
If the grammar is a bit more complicated e.g. nested ( ) then that simple approach won't work.
you could try to use a regEx but that still requires a rather simple grammar so if you end up having a complex grammar your best choice is a real parser. Irony is easy to use since you can write it all in simple c# (some knowledge of BNF is a plus though).

Do you need to support multiple structs ? In other words, does this need to be dynamic; or do you know the struct definition at compile time ?
Parsing the string with a regex would be the obvious choice.
Here is a regex, that will parse your string format:
private static readonly Regex regParser = new Regex(#"^\(params\s(\((?<name>[a-zA-Z]+)\s(?<value>[\d\.]+)\))+\)$", RegexOptions.Compiled);
Running that regex on a string will give you two groups named "name" and "value". The Captures property of each group will contain the names and values.
If the struct type is unknown at compile time, then you will need to use reflection to fill in the fields.
If you mean to generate the struct definition at runtime, you will need to use Reflection to emit the type; or you will need to generate the source code.
Which part are you having trouble with ?

A regex can do the job for you:
public Dictionary<string, double> ParseString(string input){
var dict = new Dictionary<string, double>();
try
{
var re = new Regex(#"(?:\(params\s)?(?:\((?<n>[^\s]+)\s(?<v>[^\)]+)\))");
foreach (Match m in re.Matches(input))
dict.Add(m.Groups["n"].Value, double.Parse(m.Groups["v"].Value));
}
catch
{
throw new Exception("Invalid format!");
}
return dict;
}
use it like:
string str = "(params (abc 1.3)(sdc 2.0)(www 3.05))";
var parsed = ParseString(str);
// parsed["abc"] would now return 1.3
That might fit better than creating a lot of different structs for every possible input string, and using reflection for filling them. I dont think that is worth the effort.
Furthermore I assumed the input string is always in exactly the format you posted.

You might consider performing just enough string manipulation to make the input look like standard command line arguments then use an off-the-shelf command line argument parser like NDesk.Options to populate the Params object. You give up some efficiency but you make it up in maintainability.
public Params Parse(string input)
{
var #params = new Params();
var argv = ConvertToArgv(input);
new NDesk.Options.OptionSet
{
{"abc=", v => Double.TryParse(v, out #params.abc)},
{"sdc=", v => Double.TryParse(v, out #params.sdc)},
{"www=", v => Double.TryParse(v, out #params.www)}
}
.Parse(argv);
return #params;
}
private string[] ConvertToArgv(string input)
{
return input
.Replace('(', '-')
.Split(new[] {')', ' '});
}

Do you want to build a data representation of your defined syntax?
If you are looking for easily maintainability, without having to write long RegEx statements you could build your own Lexer parser. here is a prior discussion on SO with good links in the answers as well to help you
Poor man's "lexer" for C#

I would just do a basic recursive-descent parser. It may be more general than you want, but nothing else will be much faster.

Here's an out-of-the-box approach:
convert () to {} and [SPACE] to ":", then use System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptSerializer.Deserialize
string s = "(params (abc 1.3)(sdc 2.0))"
.Replace(" ", ":")
.Replace("(", "{")
.Replace(")","}");
return new System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptSerializer().Deserialize(s);

int array to string

In C#, I have an array of ints, containing digits only. I want to convert this array to string.
Array example:
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
How can I convert this to a string formatted as: "012301"?

at.net 3.5 use:
String.Join("", new List<int>(array).ConvertAll(i => i.ToString()).ToArray());
at.net 4.0 or above use: (see #Jan Remunda's answer)
string result = string.Join("", array);

You can simply use String.Join function, and as separator use string.Empty because it uses StringBuilder internally.
string result = string.Join(string.Empty, new []{0,1,2,3,0,1});
E.g.: If you use semicolon as separator, the result would be 0;1;2;3;0;1.
It actually works with null separator, and second parameter can be enumerable of any objects, like:
string result = string.Join(null, new object[]{0,1,2,3,0,"A",DateTime.Now});

I realize my opinion is probably not the popular one, but I guess I have a hard time jumping on the Linq-y band wagon. It's nifty. It's condensed. I get that and I'm not opposed to using it where it's appropriate. Maybe it's just me, but I feel like people have stopped thinking about creating utility functions to accomplish what they want and instead prefer to litter their code with (sometimes) excessively long lines of Linq code for the sake of creating a dense 1-liner.
I'm not saying that any of the Linq answers that people have provided here are bad, but I guess I feel like there is the potential that these single lines of code can start to grow longer and more obscure as you need to handle various situations. What if your array is null? What if you want a delimited string instead of just purely concatenated? What if some of the integers in your array are double-digit and you want to pad each value with leading zeros so that the string for each element is the same length as the rest?
Taking one of the provided answers as an example:
result = arr.Aggregate(string.Empty, (s, i) => s + i.ToString());
If I need to worry about the array being null, now it becomes this:
result = (arr == null) ? null : arr.Aggregate(string.Empty, (s, i) => s + i.ToString());
If I want a comma-delimited string, now it becomes this:
result = (arr == null) ? null : arr.Skip(1).Aggregate(arr[0].ToString(), (s, i) => s + "," + i.ToString());
This is still not too bad, but I think it's not obvious at a glance what this line of code is doing.
Of course, there's nothing stopping you from throwing this line of code into your own utility function so that you don't have that long mess mixed in with your application logic, especially if you're doing it in multiple places:
public static string ToStringLinqy<T>(this T[] array, string delimiter)
{
// edit: let's replace this with a "better" version using a StringBuilder
//return (array == null) ? null : (array.Length == 0) ? string.Empty : array.Skip(1).Aggregate(array[0].ToString(), (s, i) => s + "," + i.ToString());
return (array == null) ? null : (array.Length == 0) ? string.Empty : array.Skip(1).Aggregate(new StringBuilder(array[0].ToString()), (s, i) => s.Append(delimiter).Append(i), s => s.ToString());
}
But if you're going to put it into a utility function anyway, do you really need it to be condensed down into a 1-liner? In that case why not throw in a few extra lines for clarity and take advantage of a StringBuilder so that you're not doing repeated concatenation operations:
public static string ToStringNonLinqy<T>(this T[] array, string delimiter)
{
if (array != null)
{
// edit: replaced my previous implementation to use StringBuilder
if (array.Length > 0)
{
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
builder.Append(array[0]);
for (int i = 1; i < array.Length; i++)
{
builder.Append(delimiter);
builder.Append(array[i]);
}
return builder.ToString()
}
else
{
return string.Empty;
}
}
else
{
return null;
}
}
And if you're really so concerned about performance, you could even turn it into a hybrid function that decides whether to do string.Join or to use a StringBuilder depending on how many elements are in the array (this is a micro-optimization, not worth doing in my opinion and possibly more harmful than beneficial, but I'm using it as an example for this problem):
public static string ToString<T>(this T[] array, string delimiter)
{
if (array != null)
{
// determine if the length of the array is greater than the performance threshold for using a stringbuilder
// 10 is just an arbitrary threshold value I've chosen
if (array.Length < 10)
{
// assumption is that for arrays of less than 10 elements
// this code would be more efficient than a StringBuilder.
// Note: this is a crazy/pointless micro-optimization. Don't do this.
string[] values = new string[array.Length];
for (int i = 0; i < values.Length; i++)
values[i] = array[i].ToString();
return string.Join(delimiter, values);
}
else
{
// for arrays of length 10 or longer, use a StringBuilder
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.Append(array[0]);
for (int i = 1; i < array.Length; i++)
{
sb.Append(delimiter);
sb.Append(array[i]);
}
return sb.ToString();
}
}
else
{
return null;
}
}
For this example, the performance impact is probably not worth caring about, but the point is that if you are in a situation where you actually do need to be concerned with the performance of your operations, whatever they are, then it will most likely be easier and more readable to handle that within a utility function than using a complex Linq expression.
That utility function still looks kind of clunky. Now let's ditch the hybrid stuff and do this:
// convert an enumeration of one type into an enumeration of another type
public static IEnumerable<TOut> Convert<TIn, TOut>(this IEnumerable<TIn> input, Func<TIn, TOut> conversion)
{
foreach (TIn value in input)
{
yield return conversion(value);
}
}
// concatenate the strings in an enumeration separated by the specified delimiter
public static string Delimit<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, string delimiter)
{
IEnumerator<T> enumerator = input.GetEnumerator();
if (enumerator.MoveNext())
{
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder();
// start off with the first element
builder.Append(enumerator.Current);
// append the remaining elements separated by the delimiter
while (enumerator.MoveNext())
{
builder.Append(delimiter);
builder.Append(enumerator.Current);
}
return builder.ToString();
}
else
{
return string.Empty;
}
}
// concatenate all elements
public static string ToString<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input)
{
return ToString(input, string.Empty);
}
// concatenate all elements separated by a delimiter
public static string ToString<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, string delimiter)
{
return input.Delimit(delimiter);
}
// concatenate all elements, each one left-padded to a minimum length
public static string ToString<T>(this IEnumerable<T> input, int minLength, char paddingChar)
{
return input.Convert(i => i.ToString().PadLeft(minLength, paddingChar)).Delimit(string.Empty);
}
Now we have separate and fairly compact utility functions, each of which are arguable useful on their own.
Ultimately, my point is not that you shouldn't use Linq, but rather just to say don't forget about the benefits of creating your own utility functions, even if they are small and perhaps only contain a single line that returns the result from a line of Linq code. If nothing else, you'll be able to keep your application code even more condensed than you could achieve with a line of Linq code, and if you are using it in multiple places, then using a utility function makes it easier to adjust your output in case you need to change it later.
For this problem, I'd rather just write something like this in my application code:
int[] arr = { 0, 1, 2, 3, 0, 1 };
// 012301
result = arr.ToString<int>();
// comma-separated values
// 0,1,2,3,0,1
result = arr.ToString(",");
// left-padded to 2 digits
// 000102030001
result = arr.ToString(2, '0');

To avoid the creation of an extra array you could do the following.
var builder = new StringBuilder();
Array.ForEach(arr, x => builder.Append(x));
var res = builder.ToString();

string result = arr.Aggregate("", (s, i) => s + i.ToString());
(Disclaimer: If you have a lot of digits (hundreds, at least) and you care about performance, I suggest eschewing this method and using a StringBuilder, as in JaredPar's answer.)

You can do:
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
string results = string.Join("",arr.Select(i => i.ToString()).ToArray());
That gives you your results.

I like using StringBuilder with Aggregate(). The "trick" is that Append() returns the StringBuilder instance itself:
var sb = arr.Aggregate( new StringBuilder(), ( s, i ) => s.Append( i ) );
var result = sb.ToString();

string.Join("", (from i in arr select i.ToString()).ToArray())
In the .NET 4.0 the string.Join can use an IEnumerable<string> directly:
string.Join("", from i in arr select i.ToString())

I've left this here for posterity but don't recommend its use as it's not terribly readable. This is especially true now that I've come back to see if after a period of some time and have wondered what I was thinking when I wrote it (I was probably thinking 'crap, must get this written before someone else posts an answer'.)
string s = string.Concat(arr.Cast<object>().ToArray());

The most efficient way is not to convert each int into a string, but rather create one string out of an array of chars. Then the garbage collector only has one new temp object to worry about.
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
string result = new string(Array.ConvertAll<int,char>(arr, x => Convert.ToChar(x + '0')));

This is a roundabout way to go about it its not much code and easy for beginners to understand
int[] arr = {0,1,2,3,0,1};
string joined = "";
foreach(int i in arr){
joined += i.ToString();
}
int number = int.Parse(joined);

If this is long array you could use
var sb = arr.Aggregate(new StringBuilder(), ( s, i ) => s.Append( i ), s.ToString());

// This is the original array
int[] nums = {1, 2, 3};
// This is an empty string we will end up with
string numbers = "";
// iterate on every char in the array
foreach (var item in nums)
{
// add the char to the empty string
numbers += Convert.ToString(item);
}
// Write the string in the console
Console.WriteLine(numbers);