How does Func<T,TResult> Work?

How does Func<T,TResult> Work? - c#

I am creating a Distinct extension method where I can pass in the criteria like the following.
persons.Distinct(p => p.Name);
I got the code from the web but I am having a hard time understanding the purpose of Func<T, TResult>. Also, when I say p => p.Name am I sending the String Name or am I sending the complete Person object? Here is the new Distinct method:
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
public static IEnumerable<T> Distinct<T>(
this IEnumerable<T> list, Func<T,object> checker)
{
return list.Distinct(new GenericComparer<T>(checker));
}
}
public class GenericComparer<T> : IEqualityComparer<T>
{
private Func<T, object> _checker;
public GenericComparer(Func<T,object> checker)
{
_checker = checker;
}
public bool Equals(T x, T y)
{
return _checker(x).Equals(_checker(y));
}
public int GetHashCode(T obj)
{
return _checker(obj).GetHashCode();
}
}
And here is the usage:
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var persons = new List<Person>()
{
new Person() { Id = 1, Name = "Mary"},
new Person() {Id = 2, Name="John"},
new Person() { Id = 3, Name = "Mary"}
};
var uniquePersons = persons.Distinct(p => p.Name);
foreach(var person in uniquePersons)
{
Console.WriteLine(person.Name);
}
}

When you do this:
persons.Distinct(p => p.Name);
You're basically creating a function on the fly (using lambda expressions), that looks like this:
string theFunction(Person p)
{
return p.Name;
}
This is a function that fits the signature of a Func<Person,String> delegate. The Distinct method can take a delegate (basically a function pointer) which it uses to determine whether or not an element is distinct - in your case, only unique strings (returned by the function above) will be considered "distinct" elements. This delegate is run on each element of your "persons" enumerable, and the results of those functions are used. It then creates a sequence (IEnumerable<Person>) from those elements.

Func<T, TResult>
defines a function that accepts one parameter (of type T) and returns an object (of type TResult).
In your case, if you want a function that takes a Person object and returns a string...you'd want
Func<Person, string>
which is the equivalent of:
string Function(Person p)
{
return p.Name;
}

You are getting back the distinct People, under the assumption that two People are the same if they have the same name
If you want a distinct set of names, you can use this:
IEnumerable<String> names = persons.Select(p => p.Name).Distinct();

Related

pass lambda expression as callback to an extension method and pass parameter to it

I am trying to understand the concept of lambda expression,extension method,Linq and IEnumerable interface. You can guess that i am farely new to c sharp.Here i've come up with a problem which will incorporate all the above mentioned concepts . Here i have a list which contain three object.I want to change the name property of a Students object in a specified index .I wrote an extension method which accept a callback function.Callback function accepts an integer index and a new Name string. It should change the name property and return the object .But my code failed to do so as i am not sure how to pass parameter to Func callback in extension method.I am in need of some assistant to understand the problem and fix errors from my code ?
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<Students> students = new List<Students>();
students.Add(new Students(111443, "sakib"));
students.Add(new Students(111445, "zami"));
students.Add(new Students(111444, "habib"));
var student = students.First();
var changed1 = students.Change((int num,string newname) => { return students[num].s_name = newname;});
}
}
public class Students
{
public int s_id;
public string s_name;
public Students(int id, string name)
{
this.s_id = id;
this.s_name = name;
}
}
public static class LinqHelper
{
public static IEnumerable<T> Change<T> (this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<int,string,T> callback)
{
var myList = new List<Students>();
myList.Add(callback(1,"zami")); // i was passing parameter here which is not so helpful i guess !
return myList;
}
}

The Func < int, string, T > denotes a function that accepts an integer and string as inputs and T as the return type. The anonymous function you have used has a return type of "string":
var changed1 = students.Change((int num,string newname) => { return students[num].s_name = newname;});
You should return the student instance from the function to make it work. Try replacing the above code with the following:
var changed1 = students.Change((int index, string newname) =>
{
var studentObj = students[index];
studentObj.s_name = newname;
return studentObj;
});
To allow the LinqHelper to accept the index and argument, use the following:
public static class LinqHelper
{
public static IEnumerable<T> Change<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<int, string, T> callback, int index, string argument)
{
var myList = new List<T>();
myList.Add(callback(index, argument)); // i was passing parameter here which is not so helpful i guess !
return myList;
}
}
And then, you could invoke the method as follows:
var changed1 = students.Change((int index, string newname) =>
{
var studentObj = students[index];
studentObj.s_name = newname;
return studentObj;
},
1,
"zami");

You haven't created the lambda that evaluated to Func<int, string, T>. Your call to Change extension should look like:
var changed1 = students.Change((num, newnam) => {
students[num].s_name = newnam;
return students[num];
});
(you should return T as Func requires).

Pass LINQ query to method to select dynamically form collection

I already looked up on the question on SO, but couldn't find a solution for my problem.
In my program is a class whose sole reason is selecting from a collection of data passed to it via constructor.
What I need to to is pass a LINQ query to the selecting method to select from said data. However I have no luck solving my problem.
Here is the code:
public class ServiceClient<TInput>
{
private readonly IEnumerable<TInput> data;
public ServiceClient(IEnumerable<TInput> dataInput)
{
this.data = dataInput;
}
public TResult Send<TResult>(Func<IEnumerable<TInput>, TResult> selector)
{
var selectedData = this.data.Select(selector); // How to do the selection here???
// ...
}
}
The class is called this way:
private static void Main(string[] args)
{
var persons = new List<Person>
{
new Person { Id = 0, FamilyId = 0 },
new Person { Id = 1, FamilyId = 0 },
new Person { Id = 2, FamilyId = 1 }
};
var func = new Func<IEnumerable<Person>, Person>(Target);
var client = new ServiceClient<Person>(persons);
client.Send(func);
}
private static Person Target(IEnumerable<Person> enumerable)
{
return enumerable.SingleOrDefault(p => p.Id == 0);
}

Replace:
var selectedData = this.data.Select(selector);
with:
var selectedData = selector(this.data);
It should be enough.
selector is delegate that acceps collection and returns single element, so you need invoke selector delegate with data argument.
If you would like to use Select like this.data.Select(..) your selector delegate should rather be like Func<TInput, TResult> - delegate that projects one element into another.

You need to change Send that way:
public TResult Send<TResult>(Func<IEnumerable<TInput>, TResult> selector)
{
return selector(data);
}

Generic method to set the value of a property using expressions/lambda

I am trying to find a generic way to assign values to a property dictated by a lambda expression, look at the example code below, how would the signature for the ConverToEntities method look and how would it be called?
static void Main()
{
List<long> ids = new List<long> {1, 2, 3};
//Non generic way
List<Data> dataItems = ids.ConvertToDataItems();
//Generic attempt!!
List<Data> differntDataItems =
ids.ConvertToEntities<Data>( p => p.DataId );
}
public class Data
{
public long DataId;
public string Name;
}
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
public static List<Data> ConvertToDataItems(this List<long> dataIds)
{
return dataIds.Select(p => new Data { DataId = p }).ToList();
}
public static List<T> ConvertToEntities<TProp>(
this List<long> entities, Func<TProp> lambdaProperty )
{
return entities.Select(p => new T {lambdaProperty} ).ToList();
}
}

Ok. The closest I could get was this :
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
List<long> ids = new List<long> { 1, 2, 3 };
//Non generic way
List<Data> dataItems = ids.ConvertToDataItems();
//Generic attempt!!
Func<long, Data> selector = (p => new Data { DataId = p });
List<Data> differntDataItems = ids.ConvertToEntities<Data>(selector);
}
}
public class Data
{
public long DataId;
public string Name;
}
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
public static List<Data> ConvertToDataItems(this List<long> dataIds)
{
return dataIds.Select(p => new Data { DataId = p }).ToList();
}
public static List<TProp> ConvertToEntities<TProp>(this List<long> entities, Func<long, TProp> selector)
{
return entities.Select(selector).ToList();
}
}
This works.
I have the feeling you got urself a little confused with what you actually want as the return type. It would be cool to be able to specify what we want in the method call or smth. For example:
public static List<TProp> ConvertToEntities<T, TProp>(List<T> entities, Func<T, TProp> selector)
{
return entities.Select(selector).ToList();
}
This provides us more flexibility on the return type. But since we are doing this using extensions, I assume this is impractical because we need to know what type we are extending:
this List<long> entities,
Nice question.
EDIT Code suggestion fix.

You can do something like this, but it's not as simple or nice. The lambda p => p.DataId gives you the get accessor of the property. You could use Expressions to get the setter, but it's probably better to use the setter directly in the lambda:
List<Data> differntDataItems =
ids.ConvertToEntities<long, Data>((p, i) => p.DataId = i);
The implementation would look like this:
public static List<T> ConvertToEntities<TProp, T>(
this List<TProp> dataIds, Action<T, TProp> lambdaProperty)
where T : new()
{
return dataIds.Select(
p =>
{
var result = new T();
lambdaProperty(result, p);
return result;
}).ToList();
}

I believe #Zortkun is right about the return type. Try the followin:
public static List<TProp> ConvertToEntities<TProp>(
this List<long> entities, Func<long, TProp> lambdaProperty )
{
return entities.Select(lambdaProperty).ToList();
}
and you would call it as follows:
ids.ConvertToEntities<Data>( p => new Data { DataId = p } );

Distinct() with lambda?

Right, so I have an enumerable and wish to get distinct values from it.
Using System.Linq, there's, of course, an extension method called Distinct. In the simple case, it can be used with no parameters, like:
var distinctValues = myStringList.Distinct();
Well and good, but if I have an enumerable of objects for which I need to specify equality, the only available overload is:
var distinctValues = myCustomerList.Distinct(someEqualityComparer);
The equality comparer argument must be an instance of IEqualityComparer<T>. I can do this, of course, but it's somewhat verbose and, well, cludgy.
What I would have expected is an overload that would take a lambda, say a Func<T, T, bool>:
var distinctValues = myCustomerList.Distinct((c1, c2) => c1.CustomerId == c2.CustomerId);
Anyone know if some such extension exists, or some equivalent workaround? Or am I missing something?
Alternatively, is there a way of specifying an IEqualityComparer inline (embarrass me)?
Update
I found a reply by Anders Hejlsberg to a post in an MSDN forum on this subject. He says:
The problem you're going to run into is that when two objects compare
equal they must have the same GetHashCode return value (or else the
hash table used internally by Distinct will not function correctly).
We use IEqualityComparer because it packages compatible
implementations of Equals and GetHashCode into a single interface.
I suppose that makes sense.

IEnumerable<Customer> filteredList = originalList
.GroupBy(customer => customer.CustomerId)
.Select(group => group.First());

It looks to me like you want DistinctBy from MoreLINQ. You can then write:
var distinctValues = myCustomerList.DistinctBy(c => c.CustomerId);
Here's a cut-down version of DistinctBy (no nullity checking and no option to specify your own key comparer):
public static IEnumerable<TSource> DistinctBy<TSource, TKey>
(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector)
{
HashSet<TKey> knownKeys = new HashSet<TKey>();
foreach (TSource element in source)
{
if (knownKeys.Add(keySelector(element)))
{
yield return element;
}
}
}

To Wrap things up . I think most of the people which came here like me want the simplest solution possible without using any libraries and with best possible performance.
(The accepted group by method for me i think is an overkill in terms of performance. )
Here is a simple extension method using the IEqualityComparer interface which works also for null values.
Usage:
var filtered = taskList.DistinctBy(t => t.TaskExternalId).ToArray();
Extension Method Code
public static class LinqExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<T> DistinctBy<T, TKey>(this IEnumerable<T> items, Func<T, TKey> property)
{
GeneralPropertyComparer<T, TKey> comparer = new GeneralPropertyComparer<T,TKey>(property);
return items.Distinct(comparer);
}
}
public class GeneralPropertyComparer<T,TKey> : IEqualityComparer<T>
{
private Func<T, TKey> expr { get; set; }
public GeneralPropertyComparer (Func<T, TKey> expr)
{
this.expr = expr;
}
public bool Equals(T left, T right)
{
var leftProp = expr.Invoke(left);
var rightProp = expr.Invoke(right);
if (leftProp == null && rightProp == null)
return true;
else if (leftProp == null ^ rightProp == null)
return false;
else
return leftProp.Equals(rightProp);
}
public int GetHashCode(T obj)
{
var prop = expr.Invoke(obj);
return (prop==null)? 0:prop.GetHashCode();
}
}

Shorthand solution
myCustomerList.GroupBy(c => c.CustomerId, (key, c) => c.FirstOrDefault());

No there is no such extension method overload for this. I've found this frustrating myself in the past and as such I usually write a helper class to deal with this problem. The goal is to convert a Func<T,T,bool> to IEqualityComparer<T,T>.
Example
public class EqualityFactory {
private sealed class Impl<T> : IEqualityComparer<T,T> {
private Func<T,T,bool> m_del;
private IEqualityComparer<T> m_comp;
public Impl(Func<T,T,bool> del) {
m_del = del;
m_comp = EqualityComparer<T>.Default;
}
public bool Equals(T left, T right) {
return m_del(left, right);
}
public int GetHashCode(T value) {
return m_comp.GetHashCode(value);
}
}
public static IEqualityComparer<T,T> Create<T>(Func<T,T,bool> del) {
return new Impl<T>(del);
}
}
This allows you to write the following
var distinctValues = myCustomerList
.Distinct(EqualityFactory.Create((c1, c2) => c1.CustomerId == c2.CustomerId));

Here's a simple extension method that does what I need...
public static class EnumerableExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<TKey> Distinct<T, TKey>(this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<T, TKey> selector)
{
return source.GroupBy(selector).Select(x => x.Key);
}
}
It's a shame they didn't bake a distinct method like this into the framework, but hey ho.

This will do what you want but I don't know about performance:
var distinctValues =
from cust in myCustomerList
group cust by cust.CustomerId
into gcust
select gcust.First();
At least it's not verbose.

From .NET 6 or later, there is a new build-in method Enumerable.DistinctBy to achieve this.
var distinctValues = myCustomerList.DistinctBy(c => c.CustomerId);
// With IEqualityComparer
var distinctValues = myCustomerList.DistinctBy(c => c.CustomerId, someEqualityComparer);

Something I have used which worked well for me.
/// <summary>
/// A class to wrap the IEqualityComparer interface into matching functions for simple implementation
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T">The type of object to be compared</typeparam>
public class MyIEqualityComparer<T> : IEqualityComparer<T>
{
/// <summary>
/// Create a new comparer based on the given Equals and GetHashCode methods
/// </summary>
/// <param name="equals">The method to compute equals of two T instances</param>
/// <param name="getHashCode">The method to compute a hashcode for a T instance</param>
public MyIEqualityComparer(Func<T, T, bool> equals, Func<T, int> getHashCode)
{
if (equals == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException("equals", "Equals parameter is required for all MyIEqualityComparer instances");
EqualsMethod = equals;
GetHashCodeMethod = getHashCode;
}
/// <summary>
/// Gets the method used to compute equals
/// </summary>
public Func<T, T, bool> EqualsMethod { get; private set; }
/// <summary>
/// Gets the method used to compute a hash code
/// </summary>
public Func<T, int> GetHashCodeMethod { get; private set; }
bool IEqualityComparer<T>.Equals(T x, T y)
{
return EqualsMethod(x, y);
}
int IEqualityComparer<T>.GetHashCode(T obj)
{
if (GetHashCodeMethod == null)
return obj.GetHashCode();
return GetHashCodeMethod(obj);
}
}

All solutions I've seen here rely on selecting an already comparable field. If one needs to compare in a different way, though, this solution here seems to work generally, for something like:
somedoubles.Distinct(new LambdaComparer<double>((x, y) => Math.Abs(x - y) < double.Epsilon)).Count()

Take another way:
var distinctValues = myCustomerList.
Select(x => x._myCaustomerProperty).Distinct();
The sequence return distinct elements compare them by property '_myCaustomerProperty' .

You can use LambdaEqualityComparer:
var distinctValues
= myCustomerList.Distinct(new LambdaEqualityComparer<OurType>((c1, c2) => c1.CustomerId == c2.CustomerId));
public class LambdaEqualityComparer<T> : IEqualityComparer<T>
{
public LambdaEqualityComparer(Func<T, T, bool> equalsFunction)
{
_equalsFunction = equalsFunction;
}
public bool Equals(T x, T y)
{
return _equalsFunction(x, y);
}
public int GetHashCode(T obj)
{
return obj.GetHashCode();
}
private readonly Func<T, T, bool> _equalsFunction;
}

You can use InlineComparer
public class InlineComparer<T> : IEqualityComparer<T>
{
//private readonly Func<T, T, bool> equalsMethod;
//private readonly Func<T, int> getHashCodeMethod;
public Func<T, T, bool> EqualsMethod { get; private set; }
public Func<T, int> GetHashCodeMethod { get; private set; }
public InlineComparer(Func<T, T, bool> equals, Func<T, int> hashCode)
{
if (equals == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("equals", "Equals parameter is required for all InlineComparer instances");
EqualsMethod = equals;
GetHashCodeMethod = hashCode;
}
public bool Equals(T x, T y)
{
return EqualsMethod(x, y);
}
public int GetHashCode(T obj)
{
if (GetHashCodeMethod == null) return obj.GetHashCode();
return GetHashCodeMethod(obj);
}
}
Usage sample:
var comparer = new InlineComparer<DetalleLog>((i1, i2) => i1.PeticionEV == i2.PeticionEV && i1.Etiqueta == i2.Etiqueta, i => i.PeticionEV.GetHashCode() + i.Etiqueta.GetHashCode());
var peticionesEV = listaLogs.Distinct(comparer).ToList();
Assert.IsNotNull(peticionesEV);
Assert.AreNotEqual(0, peticionesEV.Count);
Source:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/5969691/206730
Using IEqualityComparer for Union
Can I specify my explicit type comparator inline?

If Distinct() doesn't produce unique results, try this one:
var filteredWC = tblWorkCenter.GroupBy(cc => cc.WCID_I).Select(grp => grp.First()).Select(cc => new Model.WorkCenter { WCID = cc.WCID_I }).OrderBy(cc => cc.WCID);
ObservableCollection<Model.WorkCenter> WorkCenter = new ObservableCollection<Model.WorkCenter>(filteredWC);

A tricky way to do this is use Aggregate() extension, using a dictionary as accumulator with the key-property values as keys:
var customers = new List<Customer>();
var distincts = customers.Aggregate(new Dictionary<int, Customer>(),
(d, e) => { d[e.CustomerId] = e; return d; },
d => d.Values);
And a GroupBy-style solution is using ToLookup():
var distincts = customers.ToLookup(c => c.CustomerId).Select(g => g.First());

IEnumerable lambda extension:
public static class ListExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<T> Distinct<T>(this IEnumerable<T> list, Func<T, int> hashCode)
{
Dictionary<int, T> hashCodeDic = new Dictionary<int, T>();
list.ToList().ForEach(t =>
{
var key = hashCode(t);
if (!hashCodeDic.ContainsKey(key))
hashCodeDic.Add(key, t);
});
return hashCodeDic.Select(kvp => kvp.Value);
}
}
Usage:
class Employee
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public int EmployeeID { get; set; }
}
//Add 5 employees to List
List<Employee> lst = new List<Employee>();
Employee e = new Employee { Name = "Shantanu", EmployeeID = 123456 };
lst.Add(e);
lst.Add(e);
Employee e1 = new Employee { Name = "Adam Warren", EmployeeID = 823456 };
lst.Add(e1);
//Add a space in the Name
Employee e2 = new Employee { Name = "Adam Warren", EmployeeID = 823456 };
lst.Add(e2);
//Name is different case
Employee e3 = new Employee { Name = "adam warren", EmployeeID = 823456 };
lst.Add(e3);
//Distinct (without IEqalityComparer<T>) - Returns 4 employees
var lstDistinct1 = lst.Distinct();
//Lambda Extension - Return 2 employees
var lstDistinct = lst.Distinct(employee => employee.EmployeeID.GetHashCode() ^ employee.Name.ToUpper().Replace(" ", "").GetHashCode());

The Microsoft System.Interactive package has a version of Distinct that takes a key selector lambda. This is effectively the same as Jon Skeet's solution, but it may be helpful for people to know, and to check out the rest of the library.

Here's how you can do it:
public static class Extensions
{
public static IEnumerable<T> MyDistinct<T, V>(this IEnumerable<T> query,
Func<T, V> f,
Func<IGrouping<V,T>,T> h=null)
{
if (h==null) h=(x => x.First());
return query.GroupBy(f).Select(h);
}
}
This method allows you to use it by specifying one parameter like .MyDistinct(d => d.Name), but it also allows you to specify a having condition as a second parameter like so:
var myQuery = (from x in _myObject select x).MyDistinct(d => d.Name,
x => x.FirstOrDefault(y=>y.Name.Contains("1") || y.Name.Contains("2"))
);
N.B. This would also allow you to specify other functions like for example .LastOrDefault(...) as well.
If you want to expose just the condition, you can have it even simpler by implementing it as:
public static IEnumerable<T> MyDistinct2<T, V>(this IEnumerable<T> query,
Func<T, V> f,
Func<T,bool> h=null
)
{
if (h == null) h = (y => true);
return query.GroupBy(f).Select(x=>x.FirstOrDefault(h));
}
In this case, the query would just look like:
var myQuery2 = (from x in _myObject select x).MyDistinct2(d => d.Name,
y => y.Name.Contains("1") || y.Name.Contains("2")
);
N.B. Here, the expression is simpler, but note .MyDistinct2 uses .FirstOrDefault(...) implicitly.
Note: The examples above are using the following demo class
class MyObject
{
public string Name;
public string Code;
}
private MyObject[] _myObject = {
new MyObject() { Name = "Test1", Code = "T"},
new MyObject() { Name = "Test2", Code = "Q"},
new MyObject() { Name = "Test2", Code = "T"},
new MyObject() { Name = "Test5", Code = "Q"}
};

I'm assuming you have an IEnumerable<T>, and in your example delegate, you would like c1 and c2 to be referring to two elements in this list?
I believe you could achieve this with a self join:
var distinctResults = from c1 in myList
join c2 in myList on <your equality conditions>

I found this as the easiest solution.
public static IEnumerable<TSource> DistinctBy<TSource, TKey>
(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector)
{
return source.GroupBy(keySelector).Select(x => x.FirstOrDefault());
}

Is it possible to cache a value evaluated in a lambda expression?

In the ContainsIngredients method in the following code, is it possible to cache the p.Ingredients value instead of explicitly referencing it several times? This is a fairly trivial example that I just cooked up for illustrative purposes, but the code I'm working on references values deep inside p eg. p.InnerObject.ExpensiveMethod().Value
edit:
I'm using the PredicateBuilder from http://www.albahari.com/nutshell/predicatebuilder.html
public class IngredientBag
{
private readonly Dictionary<string, string> _ingredients = new Dictionary<string, string>();
public void Add(string type, string name)
{
_ingredients.Add(type, name);
}
public string Get(string type)
{
return _ingredients[type];
}
public bool Contains(string type)
{
return _ingredients.ContainsKey(type);
}
}
public class Potion
{
public IngredientBag Ingredients { get; private set;}
public string Name {get; private set;}
public Potion(string name) : this(name, null)
{
}
public Potion(string name, IngredientBag ingredients)
{
Name = name;
Ingredients = ingredients;
}
public static Expression<Func<Potion, bool>>
ContainsIngredients(string ingredientType, params string[] ingredients)
{
var predicate = PredicateBuilder.False<Potion>();
// Here, I'm accessing p.Ingredients several times in one
// expression. Is there any way to cache this value and
// reference the cached value in the expression?
foreach (var ingredient in ingredients)
{
var temp = ingredient;
predicate = predicate.Or (
p => p.Ingredients != null &&
p.Ingredients.Contains(ingredientType) &&
p.Ingredients.Get(ingredientType).Contains(temp));
}
return predicate;
}
}
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
var potions = new List<Potion>
{
new Potion("Invisibility", new IngredientBag()),
new Potion("Bonus"),
new Potion("Speed", new IngredientBag()),
new Potion("Strength", new IngredientBag()),
new Potion("Dummy Potion")
};
potions[0].Ingredients.Add("solid", "Eye of Newt");
potions[0].Ingredients.Add("liquid", "Gall of Peacock");
potions[0].Ingredients.Add("gas", "Breath of Spider");
potions[2].Ingredients.Add("solid", "Hair of Toad");
potions[2].Ingredients.Add("gas", "Peacock's anguish");
potions[3].Ingredients.Add("liquid", "Peacock Sweat");
potions[3].Ingredients.Add("gas", "Newt's aura");
var predicate = Potion.ContainsIngredients("solid", "Newt", "Toad")
.Or(Potion.ContainsIngredients("gas", "Spider", "Scorpion"));
foreach (var result in
from p in potions
where(predicate).Compile()(p)
select p)
{
Console.WriteLine(result.Name);
}
}

Have you considered Memoization?
The basic idea is this; if you have an expensive function call, there is a function which will calculate the expensive value on first call, but return a cached version thereafter. The function looks like this;
static Func<T> Remember<T>(Func<T> GetExpensiveValue)
{
bool isCached= false;
T cachedResult = default(T);
return () =>
{
if (!isCached)
{
cachedResult = GetExpensiveValue();
isCached = true;
}
return cachedResult;
};
}
This means you can write this;
// here's something that takes ages to calculate
Func<string> MyExpensiveMethod = () =>
{
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(5000);
return "that took ages!";
};
// and heres a function call that only calculates it the once.
Func<string> CachedMethod = Remember(() => MyExpensiveMethod());
// only the first line takes five seconds;
// the second and third calls are instant.
Console.WriteLine(CachedMethod());
Console.WriteLine(CachedMethod());
Console.WriteLine(CachedMethod());
As a general strategy, it might help.

Can't you simply write your boolean expression in a separate static function which you call from your lambda - passing p.Ingredients as a parameter...
private static bool IsIngredientPresent(IngredientBag i, string ingredientType, string ingredient)
{
return i != null && i.Contains(ingredientType) && i.Get(ingredientType).Contains(ingredient);
}
public static Expression<Func<Potion, bool>>
ContainsIngredients(string ingredientType, params string[] ingredients)
{
var predicate = PredicateBuilder.False<Potion>();
// Here, I'm accessing p.Ingredients several times in one
// expression. Is there any way to cache this value and
// reference the cached value in the expression?
foreach (var ingredient in ingredients)
{
var temp = ingredient;
predicate = predicate.Or(
p => IsIngredientPresent(p.Ingredients, ingredientType, temp));
}
return predicate;
}

Well, in this case, if you can't use Memoization, you're rather restricted since you can really only use the stack as your cache: You've got no way to declare a new variable at the scope you'll need. All I can think of (and I'm not claiming it will be pretty) that will do what you want but retain the composability you need would be something like...
private static bool TestWith<T>(T cached, Func<T, bool> predicate)
{
return predicate(cached);
}
public static Expression<Func<Potion, bool>>
ContainsIngredients(string ingredientType, params string[] ingredients)
{
var predicate = PredicateBuilder.False<Potion>();
// Here, I'm accessing p.Ingredients several times in one
// expression. Is there any way to cache this value and
// reference the cached value in the expression?
foreach (var ingredient in ingredients)
{
var temp = ingredient;
predicate = predicate.Or (
p => TestWith(p.Ingredients,
i => i != null &&
i.Contains(ingredientType) &&
i.Get(ingredientType).Contains(temp));
}
return predicate;
}
You could combine together the results from multiple TestWith calls into a more complex boolean expression where required - caching the appropriate expensive value with each call - or you can nest them within the lambdas passed as the second parameter to deal with your complex deep hierarchies.
It would be quite hard to read code though and since you might be introducing a bunch more stack transitions with all the TestWith calls, whether it improves performance would depend on just how expensive your ExpensiveCall() was.
As a note, there won't be any inlining in the original example as suggested by another answer since the expression compiler doesn't do that level of optimisation as far as I know.

I would say no in this case. I assume that the compiler can figure out that it uses the p.Ingredients variable 3 times and will keep the variable closeby on the stack or the registers or whatever it uses.

Turbulent Intellect has the exactly right answer.
I just want to advise that you can strip some of the nulls and exceptions out of the types you are using to make it friendlier to use them.
public class IngredientBag
{
private Dictionary<string, string> _ingredients =
new Dictionary<string, string>();
public void Add(string type, string name)
{
_ingredients[type] = name;
}
public string Get(string type)
{
return _ingredients.ContainsKey(type) ? _ingredients[type] : null;
}
public bool Has(string type, string name)
{
return name == null ? false : this.Get(type) == name;
}
}
public Potion(string name) : this(name, new IngredientBag()) { }
Then, if you have the query parameters in this structure...
Dictionary<string, List<string>> ingredients;
You can write the query like this.
from p in Potions
where ingredients.Any(i => i.Value.Any(v => p.IngredientBag.Has(i.Key, v))
select p;
PS, why readonly?

Develop Reference

C# (C-Sharp) is a programming language developed by Microsoft that runs on the .NET Framework.

How does Func<T,TResult> Work? - c#

You are getting back the distinct People, under the assumption that two People are the same if they have the same name If you want a distinct set of names, you can use this: IEnumerable<String> names = persons.Select(p => p.Name).Distinct();

Related

pass lambda expression as callback to an extension method and pass parameter to it

Pass LINQ query to method to select dynamically form collection

Generic method to set the value of a property using expressions/lambda

Distinct() with lambda?

Is it possible to cache a value evaluated in a lambda expression?

Categories

Resources