I'm attempting to order some data using a certain pattern and need some help figuring out how to do so. I haven't seen any examples of using linq queries within an orderby clause and am not exactly sure how to order the data in this scenario:
public IList<UserEventModel> GetListData(IDictionary<string, IList<string>> criteria, IEnumerable<UserEventModel> subscriptions)
{
subscriptions = subscriptions.OrderBy(x => x.EntityType);
}
Looking for an extension to append to EntityType to compare against the contents of 'criteria' value pair here at key[2], e.g. x => x.EntityType.? (specified collection of values)
your are almost right. Append tolist and try
subscriptions = subscriptions
.OrderBy(x => x.EntityType).ToList();
Related
I need help with filtering list data in c#.
I got 3 class named Product.cs, Storage.cs and Inventory.cs.
public class Storage{
string StorageId;
string Name;
}
public class Inventory{
string InventoryId;
string StorageId;
string ProductId;
}
I got the filled List<Storage> mStorages, List<Product> mProduct and List<Inventory> mInventories.
I have trouble to print mStorages that contain with specific productId that only can be obtained from mInventories.
So, I tried this:
List<Storage> mFilteredStorage;
for(int i=0;i<mStorages.Count;i++){
if(mStorages[i] contain (productId from inventories)){
mFilteredStorage.add(mstorages[i]);
}
So I can get mFilteredStorage that contains specific product from inventories. (in inventories there are lot of product id).
What should I do to get that filteredStorage? I tried to use list.contains() but it only return true and at last there are duplicated storage at mFilteredStorage.
Really need your help guys. Thanks in advance.
I suggest you to read about lambda-expressions, that is what you are looking for.
mFilteredStorage.AddRange(mStorages.Where(storage => inventories.Any(inventory => inventory.productId == storage.productId)).ToList());
This returns you a list with your filtered conditions. So right after Where you iterate over each item in your list, I called this item storage. (you can name those what ever you want to) Then we iterate over your object inventories with another lambda expression. This, the second lambda expression, returns either true if any of inventories's productIds match the productId of the current iterating object of mStorages or false if they don't match.
So you once the productIds match you can imagine the code like the following:
mStorages.Where(storage => true);
And once the result of the second lambda expression is true, storage will be added to the IEnumerable you will get as a result of the Where method.
Since we get an IEnumerable as return, but we want to add those Storage objects to mFilteredStorage, I convert the IEnumerable to a list, by:
/*(the return object we get from the `Where` method)*/.ToList();
You can use LINQ to accomplish your goal. Since Storage has no ProductId, the query will match by StorageId.
var filteredStoragesQry =
from storage in mStorages
where inventories.Any(inventory => inventory.StorageId == storage.StorageId)
select storage;
mFilteredStorages = filteredStoragesQry.ToList();
This query is for LINQ to objects, but it will also work in Entity Framework, when you replace mStorages and inventories by the respective DbSet objects from the context.
mStorages.Join(mInventories, x => x.StorageId, y => y.StorageId, (x, y) => new { Storage = x, ProductId = y.ProductId})
.Where(z => z.ProductId == "specificProductId").Select(z => z.Storage).ToList()
I ended with this code.
mFilteredStorage = tempStorage.GroupBy(s => s.Id).Select(group => group.First()).ToList()
This code is what I want to show.
The challenge is about converting from method chain to standard linq a piece of code full of group by.
The context
To fully understand the topic here you can read the original question (with class definitions, sample data and so on): Linq: rebuild hierarchical data from the flattened list
Thanks to #Akash Kava, I've found the solution to my problem.
Chain method formulation
var macroTabs = flattenedList
.GroupBy(x => x.IDMacroTab)
.Select((x) => new MacroTab
{
IDMacroTab = x.Key,
Tabs = x.GroupBy(t => t.IDTab)
.Select(tx => new Tab {
IDTab = tx.Key,
Slots = tx.Select(s => new Slot {
IDSlot = s.IDSlot
}).ToList()
}).ToList()
}).ToList();
But, for sake of knowledge, I've tried to convert the method chain to the standard Linq formulation but something is wrong.
What happens is similar to this..
My attempt to convert it to Linq standard syntax
var antiflatten = flattenedList
.GroupBy(x => x.IDMacroTab)
.Select(grouping => new MacroTab
{
IDMacroTab = grouping.Key,
Tabs = (from t in grouping
group grouping by t.IDTab
into group_tx
select new Tab
{
IDTab = group_tx.Key,
Slots = (from s in group_tx
from s1 in s
select new Slot
{
IDSlot = s1.IDSlot
}).ToList()
}).ToList()
});
The result in LinqPad
The classes and the sample data on NetFiddle:
https://dotnetfiddle.net/8mF1qI
This challenge helped me to understand what exactly returns a Linq Group By (and how prolix is the Linq syntax with Group By).
As LinqPad clearly shows a Group By returns a List of Groups. Group is a very simple class which has just one property: a Key
As this answer states, from definition of IGrouping (IGrouping<out TKey, out TElement> : IEnumerable<TElement>, IEnumerable) the only way to access to the content of the subgroups is to iterate through elements (a foreach, another group by, a select, ecc).
Here is shown the Linq syntax formulation of the method chain.
And here is the source code on Fiddle
But let's go on trying to see another solution:
What we usually do in SQL when we do a Group By is to list all the columns but the one which have been grouped. With Linq is different.. it still returns ALL the columns.
In this example we started with a dataset with 3 'columns' {IDMacroTab, IDTab, IDSlot}. We grouped for the first column, but Linq would return the whole dataset, unless we explicitly tell him..
I'm working on a groupby query using Linq, but I want to set the value for a new property in combination with another list. This is my code:
var result = list1.GroupBy(f => f.Name)
.ToList()
.Select(b => new Obj
{
ClientName = b.Name,
Status = (AnotherClass.List().Where(a=>a.state_id=b.????).First()).Status
})
I know I'm using a group by, but I'm not sure of how to access the value inside my bcollection to compare it with a.state_id.
This snippet:
Status = (AnotherClass.List().Where(a=>a.state_id=b.????).First()).Status
I've done that before but months ago I don't remember the syntax, when I put a dot behind b I have acces only to Key and the Linq Methods... What should be the syntax?`
Issue in your code is happening here:
a=>a.state_id=b.????
Why ?
Check type of b here, it would be IGrouping<TKey,TValue>, which is because, post GroupBy on an IEnumerable, you get result as IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey,TValue>>
What does that mean?
Think of Grouping operation in the database, where when you GroupBy on a given Key, then remaining columns that are selected need an aggregation operation,since there could be more than one record per key and that needs to be represented
How it is represented in your code
Let's assume list1 has Type T objects
You grouped the data by Name property, which is part of Type T
There's no data projection so for a given key, it will aggregate the remaining data as IEnumerable<T>, as grouped values
Result is in the format IEnumerable<IGrouping<TK, TV>>, where TK is Name and TV represent IEnumerable<T>
Let's check out some code, break your original code in following parts
var result = list1.GroupBy(f => f.Name) - result will be of type IEnumerable<IGrouping<string,T>>, where list1 is IEnumerable<T>
On doing result.Select(b => ...), b is of type IGrouping<string,T>
Further you can run Linq queries on b, as follows:
b.Key, will give access to Name Key, there's no b.Value, for that your options could be following or any other relevant Linq operations:
a=>b.Any(x => a.state_id == x.state_id) or // Suuggests if an Id match in the Collection
a=>a.state_id == b.FirstOrDefault(x => x.state_id) //Selects First or default Value
Thus you can create a final result, from the IGrouping<string,T>, as per the logical requirement / use case
Background: I have two Collections of different types of objects with different name properties (both strings). Objects in Collection1 have a field called Name, objects in Collection2 have a field called Field.
I needed to compare these 2 properties, and get items from Collection1 where there is not a match in Collection2 based on that string property (Collection1 will always have a greater or equal number of items. All items should have a matching item by Name/Field in Collection2 when finished).
The question: I've found answers using Lists and they have helped me a little(for what it's worth, I'm using Collections). I did find this answer which appears to be working for me, however I would like to convert what I've done from query syntax (if that's what it's called?) to a LINQ query. See below:
//Query for results. This code is what I'm specifically trying to convert.
var result = (from item in Collection1
where !Collection2.Any(x => x.ColumnName == item.FieldName)
select item).ToList();
//** Remove items in result from Collection1**
//...
I'm really not at all familiar with either syntax (working on it), but I think I generally understand what this is doing. I'm struggling trying to convert this to LINQ syntax though and I'd like to learn both of these options rather than some sort of nested loop.
End goal after I remove the query results from Collection1: Collection1.Count == Collection2 and the following is true for each item in the collection: ItemFromCollection1.Name == SomeItemFromCollection2.Field (if that makes sense...)
You can convert this to LINQ methods like this:
var result = Collection1.Where(item => !Collection2.Any(x => x.ColumnName == item.FieldName))
.ToList();
Your first query is the opposite of what you asked for. It's finding records that don't have an equivalent. The following will return all records in Collection1 where there is an equivalent:
var results=Collection1.Where(c1=>!Collection2.Any(c2=>c2.Field==c1.Name));
Please note that this isn't the fastest approach, especially if there is a large number of records in collection2. You can find ways of speeding it up through HashSets or Lookups.
if you want to get a list of non duplicate values to be retained then do the following.
List<string> listNonDup = new List<String>{"6","1","2","4","6","5","1"};
var singles = listNonDup.GroupBy(n => n)
.Where(g => g.Count() == 1)
.Select(g => g.Key).ToList();
Yields: 2, 4, 5
if you want a list of all the duplicate values then you can do the opposite
var duplicatesxx = listNonDup.GroupBy(s => s)
.SelectMany(g => g.Skip(1)).ToList();
Here is my query -
var data = Goaldata.GroupBy(c => c.GoalId).ToList();
This returns a Igrouping object and I want an Iqueryable object which I can directly query to get the data while in this case I have to loop through using a foreach() and then get the data. Is there another way to group by in LINQ which returns directly as a list of Iqueryable or a List as similar to what happens for order by in LINQ.
The easiest way is probably
var data = Goaldata.GroupBy(c => c.GoalId).SelectMany(c => c).ToList();
In the OO sense they aren't really grouped, but they are ordered with the groups together.
Whilst the accepted answer is correct, it seems to be unnecessarily complicated. Assuming GoalId is an int you can just use OrderBy:
var data = Goaldata.OrderBy(c => c.GoalId).ToList();
Or .GroupBy(c => c.GoalId).AsQueryable()...