We Keep Coding

Linq Expression in Case Statement

I'm using LINQ with Expression trees and a case Statement in my Select. I'm doing this because the Where Condition is build dynamically and in my Result, I need to know, which part of the where was true.
This works fine:
ParameterExpression peTbl = Expression.Parameter(typeof(MyTbl), "mytbl");
Expression left = Expression.Property(peTbl, "Col1");
Expression right = Expression.Constant((ulong)3344, typeof(ulong));
Expression e1 = Expression.Equal(left, right);
left = Expression.Property(peTbl, "Col2");
right = Expression.Constant((ulong)27, typeof(ulong));
Expression e2 = Expression.Equal(left, right);
Expression predicateBody = Expression.Or(e1, e2);
Expression<Func<MyTbl, bool>> whereCondition = Expression.Lambda<Func<MyTbl, bool>>(predicateBody, new ParameterExpression[] { peTbl });
var query = myTbl.Where(whereCondition)
.Select(s => new { mytbl = s, mycase = (s.Col1 == 3344 ? 1 : 0) });
But now, I want to use the Expression e1 in my case Statement.
Something like this:
var query = myTbl.Where(whereCondition)
.Select(s => new { mytbl = s, mycase = (e1 == true ? 1 : 0) });
Any idea how to do this?

If you query against a database, you can commit the query first and then apply the compiled e1:
var e1Compiled = Expression.Lambda<Func<MyTbl,bool>>(e1, peTbl).Compile();
var query = myTbl
.Where(whereCondition).ToList()
.Select(s => new { mytbl = s, mycase = (e1Compiled(s) ? 1 : 0) });
if there is no database, just use the compiled e1:
var query = myTbl
.Where(whereCondition)
.Select(s => new { mytbl = s, mycase = (e1Compiled(s) ? 1 : 0) });

If you want to use a lambda expression inside another one, then here is a link ti an answer I gave to another question, where you can do it. Pass expression parameter as argument to another expression

how can I extend dlinq class to have empty strings last in a sort [duplicate]

I try to make my custom orderby extension method, i successfully worked my code but in addition i want to list null or empty or zero values last in result, anyone can help me about that issue ?
Here is my extension method to orderby
public static IQueryable<T> OrderBy<T>(this IQueryable<T> q, string SortField, bool isAsc)
{
//var nullExpr = Expression.Constant(null, typeof(T));
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "p");
var prop = Expression.Property(param, SortField);
var exp = Expression.Lambda(prop, param);
string method = isAsc ? "OrderBy" : "OrderByDescending";
Type[] types = new Type[] { q.ElementType, exp.Body.Type };
var mce = Expression.Call(typeof(Queryable), method, types, q.Expression, exp);
return q.Provider.CreateQuery<T>(mce);
}
Thanks in advance

The simplest way is to use
OrderBy(e => String.IsNullOrEmpty(e.TeamName)
This doesn't require any extension method or custom IComparer implementation etc.
var entries = repository.Race.Where(e => e.EventId == id)
.OrderBy(e => String.IsNullOrEmpty(e.TeamName))
.ThenBy(e => e.LastName)
.ThenBy(e => e.FirstName);

Without using an extension method....
Create a custom IComparer<string> to check the empty values before using the default String.Compare. The first checks will return -1 instead of 1 or 1 instead of -1, if using the standard string comparison.
/// <summary>
/// Returns -1 instead of 1 if y is IsNullOrEmpty when x is Not.
/// </summary>
public class EmptyStringsAreLast : IComparer<string>
{
public int Compare(string x, string y)
{
if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(y) && !String.IsNullOrEmpty(x))
{
return -1;
}
else if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(y) && String.IsNullOrEmpty(x))
{
return 1;
}
else
{
return String.Compare(x, y);
}
}
}
Pass your EmptyStringsAreLast comparer into the OrderBy of Lambda expression. In this solution teams who have entered the race should appear alphabetical order, but the unaffiliated race entries should appear at then end.
var entries = repository.Race.Where(e => e.EventId == id)
.OrderBy(e => e.TeamName, new EmptyStringsAreLast())
.ThenBy(e => e.LastName)
.ThenBy(e => e.FirstName);

This answer is perhaps what you were originally looking for - using your generic extension method:
public static IQueryable<T> OrderByFieldNullsLast<T>(this IQueryable<T> q, string SortField, bool Ascending)
{
//We are rebuilding .OrderByDescending(p => p.SortField.HasValue).ThenBy(p => p.SortField)
//i.e. sort first by whether sortfield has a value, then by sortfield asc or sortfield desc
//create the expression tree that represents the generic parameter to the predicate
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "p");
//create an expression tree that represents the expression p=>p.SortField.HasValue
var prop = Expression.Property(param, SortField);
var hasValue = Expression.Property(prop, "HasValue");
var exp = Expression.Lambda(hasValue, param);
string method = "OrderByDescending";
Type[] types = new Type[] { q.ElementType, exp.Body.Type };
var orderByCallExpression = Expression.Call(typeof(Queryable), method, types, q.Expression, exp);
//now do the ThenBy bit,sending in the above expression to the Expression.Call
exp = Expression.Lambda(prop, param);
types = new Type[] { q.ElementType, exp.Body.Type };
method = Ascending ? "ThenBy" : "ThenByDescending";
var ThenByCallExpression = Expression.Call(typeof(Queryable), method, types,orderByCallExpression, exp);
return q.Provider.CreateQuery<T>(ThenByCallExpression);
}

Building on Dave Anson's answer, you can user Comparer.Create() to create the Comparer from a lambda. Here's an example that sorts unsorted by its myString string fields, with null or empty strings appearing last.
var sorted = unsorted.OrderBy(x => x.myString, Comparer<string>.Create((x, y) => {
if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty(y) && !string.IsNullOrEmpty(x)) return -1;
else if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(y) && string.IsNullOrEmpty(x)) return +1;
else return string.Compare(x, y);
}))
(To put them first, switch the signs on the 1 constants)

it works for me:
private static IQueryable<T> GetOrderQuery<T>(this IQueryable<T> q, BaseFilterCollection filter)
{
q = q.OrderBy(GetExpression<T>(filter.SortField));
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "p");
var prop = Expression.Property(param, filter.SortField);
var exp = Expression.Lambda(prop, param);
string method = filter.SortDirection == SortDirectionType.Asc ? "ThenBy" : "ThenByDescending";
Type[] types = { q.ElementType, exp.Body.Type };
var rs = Expression.Call(typeof(Queryable), method, types, q.Expression, exp);
return q.Provider.CreateQuery<T>(rs);
}
private static Expression<Func<T, bool>> GetExpression<T>(string sortField)
{
ParameterExpression param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "p");
Expression prop = Expression.Property(param, sortField);
var info = typeof(T).GetProperty(sortField, BindingFlags.IgnoreCase | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance);
Expression exp = Expression.Equal(prop, info.PropertyType.IsValueType
? Expression.Constant(Activator.CreateInstance(info.PropertyType))
: Expression.Constant(null));
return Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(exp, param);
}

You dont need to complicate, the easiest way is to do something like this:
YourList.OrderByDescending(x => string.IsNullOrEmpty(x.value)
Use OrderByDescending or OrderBy depending on if you want to see empty strings in the beginning or last.
Regards

Understanding Expression Tree and Parameter Evaluation

I'm attempting to modify an expression tree that dynamically builds a Contains expression that ultimately results in SQL like
P IN (123, 124, 125, 200, 201)
to instead check perform range checks, which ultimately results in SQL like
(P >= 123 AND P <= 125) OR (P >= 200 AND P <= 201)
I'm basing my solution on this post.
static public Expression<Func<TElement, bool>>
BuildContainsExpression<TElement, TValue>(
Expression<Func<TElement, TValue>> valueSelector, IEnumerable<TValue> values)
{
// Removed for post: Input checks and edge cases
var equals =
values.Select(value =>
(Expression)Expression.Equal(valueSelector.Body,
Expression.Constant(value, typeof(TValue))));
var body = equals.Aggregate<Expression>((accumulate, equal) =>
Expression.Or(accumulate, equal));
return Expression.Lambda<Func<TElement, bool>>(body, p);
}
I'm able to get the range checking to work if I provide the value for comparison:
long testValue = 5;
List<KeyValuePair<int, int>> ranges = new List<KeyValuePair<int, int>>()
{
new KeyValuePair<long, long>(3, 6),
new KeyValuePair<long, long>(10, 12),
new KeyValuePair<long, long>(20, 20),
};
List<BinaryExpression> rangeExpressions = new List<BinaryExpression>();
foreach (var pair in ranges)
{
var greaterThanOrEqual =
Expression.GreaterThanOrEqual(Expression.Constant(testValue),
Expression.Constant(pair.Key));
var lessThanOrEqual =
Expression.LessThanOrEqual(Expression.Constant(testValue),
Expression.Constant(pair.Value));
var inRange = Expression.AndAlso(greaterThanOrEqual, lessThanOrEqual);
rangeExpressions.Add(inRange);
}
var final =
rangeExpressions.Aggregate<Expression>((a, b) => Expression.Or(a, b));
var result = Expression.Lambda<Func<bool>>(final).Compile()();
However, I cannot sort out how to get the value for comparison from the passed-in expression when I drop that code into the method to be used with Linq. The signature of that method is:
Expression<Func<TElement, bool>>
BuildRangeExpression<TElement>(
Expression<Func<TElement, long>> valueSelector,
IEnumerable<long> values)
and it is used like:
Expression<MyType, bool> match =
BuildRangeExpression<MyType, long>(my => my.ProductCode, productCodes);
var result = db.MyTypes.Where(match);
QUESTION
How can I evaluate
Expression<Func<TElement, long>> valueSelector
so that I can use the value passed into BuildRangeExpression instead of my currently hard-coded value
long testValue = 5;

I think the code from the blog post has exactly what you need: all you have to do is to use valueSelector.Body instead of your Expression.Constant() and also add the original parameter to the generated expression:
public static Expression<Func<TElement, bool>>
BuildRangeExpression<TElement, TValue>(
Expression<Func<TElement, TValue>> valueSelector,
IEnumerable<Tuple<TValue, TValue>> values)
{
var p = valueSelector.Parameters.Single();
var equals = values.Select(
tuple =>
Expression.AndAlso(
Expression.GreaterThanOrEqual(
valueSelector.Body, Expression.Constant(tuple.Item1)),
Expression.LessThanOrEqual(
valueSelector.Body, Expression.Constant(tuple.Item2))));
var body = equals.Aggregate(Expression.OrElse);
return Expression.Lambda<Func<TElement, bool>>(body, p);
}

Use Expression.Parameter.
Create a parameter:
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(TElement), "arg")
Instead of Expression.Constant(testvalue), you will need to put param.
Then, you need to do:
var result = Expression.Lambda<Func<TElement, bool>>(final, param).Compile()

Compiled C# Lambda Expressions Performance

Consider the following simple manipulation over a collection:
static List<int> x = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 };
var result = x.Where(i => i % 2 == 0).Where(i => i > 5);
Now let's use Expressions. The following code is roughly equivalent:
static void UsingLambda() {
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>> lambda = l => l.Where(i => i % 2 == 0).Where(i => i > 5);
var t0 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
for (int j = 1; j < MAX; j++)
var sss = lambda(x).ToList();
var tn = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
Console.WriteLine("Using lambda: {0}", tn - t0);
}
But I want to build the expression on-the-fly, so here's a new test:
static void UsingCompiledExpression() {
var f1 = (Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>>)(l => l.Where(i => i % 2 == 0));
var f2 = (Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>>)(l => l.Where(i => i > 5));
var argX = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "x");
var f3 = Expression.Invoke(f2, Expression.Invoke(f1, argX));
var f = Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>>(f3, argX);
var c3 = f.Compile();
var t0 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
for (int j = 1; j < MAX; j++)
var sss = c3(x).ToList();
var tn = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
Console.WriteLine("Using lambda compiled: {0}", tn - t0);
}
Of course it isn't exactly like the above, so to be fair, I modify the first one slightly:
static void UsingLambdaCombined() {
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>> f1 = l => l.Where(i => i % 2 == 0);
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>> f2 = l => l.Where(i => i > 5);
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>> lambdaCombined = l => f2(f1(l));
var t0 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
for (int j = 1; j < MAX; j++)
var sss = lambdaCombined(x).ToList();
var tn = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
Console.WriteLine("Using lambda combined: {0}", tn - t0);
}
Now comes the results for MAX = 100000, VS2008, debugging ON:
Using lambda compiled: 23437500
Using lambda: 1250000
Using lambda combined: 1406250
And with debugging OFF:
Using lambda compiled: 21718750
Using lambda: 937500
Using lambda combined: 1093750
Surprise. The compiled expression is roughly 17x slower than the other alternatives. Now here comes the questions:
Am I comparing non-equivalent expressions?
Is there a mechanism to make .NET "optimize" the compiled expression?
How do I express the same chain call l.Where(i => i % 2 == 0).Where(i => i > 5); programatically?
Some more statistics. Visual Studio 2010, debugging ON, optimizations OFF:
Using lambda: 1093974
Using lambda compiled: 15315636
Using lambda combined: 781410
Debugging ON, optimizations ON:
Using lambda: 781305
Using lambda compiled: 15469839
Using lambda combined: 468783
Debugging OFF, optimizations ON:
Using lambda: 625020
Using lambda compiled: 14687970
Using lambda combined: 468765
New Surprise. Switching from VS2008 (C#3) to VS2010 (C#4), makes the UsingLambdaCombined faster than the native lambda.
Ok, I've found a way to improve the lambda compiled performance by more than an order of magnitude. Here's a tip; after running the profiler, 92% of the time is spent on:
System.Reflection.Emit.DynamicMethod.CreateDelegate(class System.Type, object)
Hmmmm... Why is it creating a new delegate in every iteration? I'm not sure, but the solution follows in a separate post.

Could it be that the inner lambdas are not being compiled?!? Here's a proof of concept:
static void UsingCompiledExpressionWithMethodCall() {
var where = typeof(Enumerable).GetMember("Where").First() as System.Reflection.MethodInfo;
where = where.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int));
var l = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "l");
var arg0 = Expression.Parameter(typeof(int), "i");
var lambda0 = Expression.Lambda<Func<int, bool>>(
Expression.Equal(Expression.Modulo(arg0, Expression.Constant(2)),
Expression.Constant(0)), arg0).Compile();
var c1 = Expression.Call(where, l, Expression.Constant(lambda0));
var arg1 = Expression.Parameter(typeof(int), "i");
var lambda1 = Expression.Lambda<Func<int, bool>>(Expression.GreaterThan(arg1, Expression.Constant(5)), arg1).Compile();
var c2 = Expression.Call(where, c1, Expression.Constant(lambda1));
var f = Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>>(c2, l);
var c3 = f.Compile();
var t0 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
for (int j = 1; j < MAX; j++)
{
var sss = c3(x).ToList();
}
var tn = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
Console.WriteLine("Using lambda compiled with MethodCall: {0}", tn - t0);
}
And now the timings are:
Using lambda: 625020
Using lambda compiled: 14687970
Using lambda combined: 468765
Using lambda compiled with MethodCall: 468765
Woot! Not only it is fast, it is faster than the native lambda. (Scratch head).
Of course the above code is simply too painful to write. Let's do some simple magic:
static void UsingCompiledConstantExpressions() {
var f1 = (Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>)(l => l.Where(i => i % 2 == 0));
var f2 = (Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>)(l => l.Where(i => i > 5));
var argX = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "x");
var f3 = Expression.Invoke(Expression.Constant(f2), Expression.Invoke(Expression.Constant(f1), argX));
var f = Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>>(f3, argX);
var c3 = f.Compile();
var t0 = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
for (int j = 1; j < MAX; j++) {
var sss = c3(x).ToList();
}
var tn = DateTime.Now.Ticks;
Console.WriteLine("Using lambda compiled constant: {0}", tn - t0);
}
And some timings, VS2010, Optimizations ON, Debugging OFF:
Using lambda: 781260
Using lambda compiled: 14687970
Using lambda combined: 468756
Using lambda compiled with MethodCall: 468756
Using lambda compiled constant: 468756
Now you could argue that I'm not generating the whole expression dynamically; just the chaining invocations. But in the above example I generate the whole expression. And the timings match. This is just a shortcut to write less code.
From my understanding, what is going on is that the .Compile() method does not propagate the compilations to inner lambdas, and thus the constant invocation of CreateDelegate. But to truly understand this, I would love to have a .NET guru comment a little about the internal stuff going on.
And why, oh why is this now faster than a native lambda!?

Recently I asked an almost identical question:
Performance of compiled-to-delegate Expression
The solution for me was that I shouldn't call Compile on the Expression, but that I should call CompileToMethod on it and compile the Expression to a static method in a dynamic assembly.
Like so:
var assemblyBuilder = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.DefineDynamicAssembly(
new AssemblyName("MyAssembly_" + Guid.NewGuid().ToString("N")),
AssemblyBuilderAccess.Run);
var moduleBuilder = assemblyBuilder.DefineDynamicModule("Module");
var typeBuilder = moduleBuilder.DefineType("MyType_" + Guid.NewGuid().ToString("N"),
TypeAttributes.Public));
var methodBuilder = typeBuilder.DefineMethod("MyMethod",
MethodAttributes.Public | MethodAttributes.Static);
expression.CompileToMethod(methodBuilder);
var resultingType = typeBuilder.CreateType();
var function = Delegate.CreateDelegate(expression.Type,
resultingType.GetMethod("MyMethod"));
It's not ideal however. I'm not quite certain to which types this applies exactly, but I think that types that are taken as parameters by the delegate, or returned by the delegate have to be public and non-generic. It has to be non-generic because generic types apparently access System.__Canon which is an internal type used by .NET under the hood for generic types and this violates the "has to be a public type rule).
For those types, you can use the apparently slower Compile. I detect them in the following way:
private static bool IsPublicType(Type t)
{
if ((!t.IsPublic && !t.IsNestedPublic) || t.IsGenericType)
{
return false;
}
int lastIndex = t.FullName.LastIndexOf('+');
if (lastIndex > 0)
{
var containgTypeName = t.FullName.Substring(0, lastIndex);
var containingType = Type.GetType(containgTypeName + "," + t.Assembly);
if (containingType != null)
{
return containingType.IsPublic;
}
return false;
}
else
{
return t.IsPublic;
}
}
But like I said, this isn't ideal and I would still like to know why compiling a method to a dynamic assembly is sometimes an order of magnitude faster. And I say sometimes because I've also seen cases where an Expression compiled with Compile is just as fast as a normal method. See my question for that.
Or if someone knows a way to bypass the "no non-public types" constraint with the dynamic assembly, that's welcome as well.

Your expressions are not equivalent and thus you get skewed results. I wrote a test bench to test this. The tests include the regular lambda call, the equivalent compiled expression, a hand made equivalent compiled expression, as well as composed versions. These should be more accurate numbers. Interestingly, I'm not seeing much variation between the plain and composed versions. And the compiled expressions are slower naturally but only by very little. You need a large enough input and iteration count to get some good numbers. It makes a difference.
As for your second question, I don't know how you'd be able to get more performance out of this so I can't help you there. It looks as good as it's going to get.
You'll find my answer to your third question in the HandMadeLambdaExpression() method. Not the easiest expression to build due to the extension methods, but doable.
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Linq.Expressions;
namespace ExpressionBench
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var values = Enumerable.Range(0, 5000);
var lambda = GetLambda();
var lambdaExpression = GetLambdaExpression().Compile();
var handMadeLambdaExpression = GetHandMadeLambdaExpression().Compile();
var composed = GetComposed();
var composedExpression = GetComposedExpression().Compile();
var handMadeComposedExpression = GetHandMadeComposedExpression().Compile();
DoTest("Lambda", values, lambda);
DoTest("Lambda Expression", values, lambdaExpression);
DoTest("Hand Made Lambda Expression", values, handMadeLambdaExpression);
Console.WriteLine();
DoTest("Composed", values, composed);
DoTest("Composed Expression", values, composedExpression);
DoTest("Hand Made Composed Expression", values, handMadeComposedExpression);
}
static void DoTest<TInput, TOutput>(string name, TInput sequence, Func<TInput, TOutput> operation, int count = 1000000)
{
for (int _ = 0; _ < 1000; _++)
operation(sequence);
var sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
for (int _ = 0; _ < count; _++)
operation(sequence);
sw.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("{0}:", name);
Console.WriteLine(" Elapsed: {0,10} {1,10} (ms)", sw.ElapsedTicks, sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
Console.WriteLine(" Average: {0,10} {1,10} (ms)", decimal.Divide(sw.ElapsedTicks, count), decimal.Divide(sw.ElapsedMilliseconds, count));
}
static Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>> GetLambda()
{
return v => v.Where(i => i % 2 == 0).Where(i => i > 5).ToList();
}
static Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>> GetLambdaExpression()
{
return v => v.Where(i => i % 2 == 0).Where(i => i > 5).ToList();
}
static Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>> GetHandMadeLambdaExpression()
{
var enumerableMethods = typeof(Enumerable).GetMethods();
var whereMethod = enumerableMethods
.Where(m => m.Name == "Where")
.Select(m => m.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int)))
.Where(m => m.GetParameters()[1].ParameterType == typeof(Func<int, bool>))
.Single();
var toListMethod = enumerableMethods
.Where(m => m.Name == "ToList")
.Select(m => m.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int)))
.Single();
// helpers to create the static method call expressions
Func<Expression, ParameterExpression, Func<ParameterExpression, Expression>, Expression> WhereExpression =
(instance, param, body) => Expression.Call(whereMethod, instance, Expression.Lambda(body(param), param));
Func<Expression, Expression> ToListExpression =
instance => Expression.Call(toListMethod, instance);
//return v => v.Where(i => i % 2 == 0).Where(i => i > 5).ToList();
var exprParam = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "v");
var expr0 = WhereExpression(exprParam,
Expression.Parameter(typeof(int), "i"),
i => Expression.Equal(Expression.Modulo(i, Expression.Constant(2)), Expression.Constant(0)));
var expr1 = WhereExpression(expr0,
Expression.Parameter(typeof(int), "i"),
i => Expression.GreaterThan(i, Expression.Constant(5)));
var exprBody = ToListExpression(expr1);
return Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>>(exprBody, exprParam);
}
static Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>> GetComposed()
{
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>> composed0 =
v => v.Where(i => i % 2 == 0);
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>> composed1 =
v => v.Where(i => i > 5);
Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>> composed2 =
v => v.ToList();
return v => composed2(composed1(composed0(v)));
}
static Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>> GetComposedExpression()
{
Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>> composed0 =
v => v.Where(i => i % 2 == 0);
Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IEnumerable<int>>> composed1 =
v => v.Where(i => i > 5);
Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>> composed2 =
v => v.ToList();
var exprParam = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "v");
var exprBody = Expression.Invoke(composed2, Expression.Invoke(composed1, Expression.Invoke(composed0, exprParam)));
return Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>>(exprBody, exprParam);
}
static Expression<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>> GetHandMadeComposedExpression()
{
var enumerableMethods = typeof(Enumerable).GetMethods();
var whereMethod = enumerableMethods
.Where(m => m.Name == "Where")
.Select(m => m.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int)))
.Where(m => m.GetParameters()[1].ParameterType == typeof(Func<int, bool>))
.Single();
var toListMethod = enumerableMethods
.Where(m => m.Name == "ToList")
.Select(m => m.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int)))
.Single();
Func<ParameterExpression, Func<ParameterExpression, Expression>, Expression> LambdaExpression =
(param, body) => Expression.Lambda(body(param), param);
Func<Expression, ParameterExpression, Func<ParameterExpression, Expression>, Expression> WhereExpression =
(instance, param, body) => Expression.Call(whereMethod, instance, Expression.Lambda(body(param), param));
Func<Expression, Expression> ToListExpression =
instance => Expression.Call(toListMethod, instance);
var composed0 = LambdaExpression(Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "v"),
v => WhereExpression(
v,
Expression.Parameter(typeof(int), "i"),
i => Expression.Equal(Expression.Modulo(i, Expression.Constant(2)), Expression.Constant(0))));
var composed1 = LambdaExpression(Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "v"),
v => WhereExpression(
v,
Expression.Parameter(typeof(int), "i"),
i => Expression.GreaterThan(i, Expression.Constant(5))));
var composed2 = LambdaExpression(Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "v"),
v => ToListExpression(v));
var exprParam = Expression.Parameter(typeof(IEnumerable<int>), "v");
var exprBody = Expression.Invoke(composed2, Expression.Invoke(composed1, Expression.Invoke(composed0, exprParam)));
return Expression.Lambda<Func<IEnumerable<int>, IList<int>>>(exprBody, exprParam);
}
}
}
And the results on my machine:
Lambda:
Elapsed: 340971948 123230 (ms)
Average: 340.971948 0.12323 (ms)
Lambda Expression:
Elapsed: 357077202 129051 (ms)
Average: 357.077202 0.129051 (ms)
Hand Made Lambda Expression:
Elapsed: 345029281 124696 (ms)
Average: 345.029281 0.124696 (ms)
Composed:
Elapsed: 340409238 123027 (ms)
Average: 340.409238 0.123027 (ms)
Composed Expression:
Elapsed: 350800599 126782 (ms)
Average: 350.800599 0.126782 (ms)
Hand Made Composed Expression:
Elapsed: 352811359 127509 (ms)
Average: 352.811359 0.127509 (ms)

Compiled lambda performance over delegates may be slower because Compiled code at runtime may not be optimized however the code you wrote manually and that compiled via C# compiler is optimized.
Second, multiple lambda expressions means multiple anonymous methods, and calling each of them takes little extra time over evaluating a straight method. For example, calling
Console.WriteLine(x);
and
Action x => Console.WriteLine(x);
x(); // this means two different calls..
are different, and with second one little more overhead is required as from compiler's perspective, its actually two different calls. First calling x itself and then within that calling x's statement.
So your combined Lambda will certainly have little slow performance over single lambda expression.
And this is independent of what is executing inside, because you are still evaluating correct logic, but you are adding additional steps for compiler to perform.
Even after expression tree is compiled, it will not have optimization, and it will still preserve its little complex structure, evaluating and calling it may have extra validation, null check etc which might be slowing down performance of compiled lambda expressions.

IQueryable<T>.Where() suitable Expression in where?

I'm very low experienced with Expressions in .NET, that's why I rather ask you guys.
How should I - see comment below:
using P = Myclass;
..
System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<Func<P, bool>> myExpression = null;
..
myExpression1 = x => foo1 == true && foo2 == false;
myExpression2 = x => ... ;
..
BinaryExpression resultExpression = System.Linq.Expressions.Expression.OrElse(myExpression1, myExpression2);
..
IQueryable<P> l = l.Where(?resultExpression?); // how to transform BinaryExpression to the suitable type?
Thank you

You can't "OR" lambdas together that way. You really want to "OR" the lambda bodies together. Here's a method to do that:
public static Expression<Func<T, bool>> OrTheseFiltersTogether<T>(
this IEnumerable<Expression<Func<T, bool>>> filters)
{
Expression<Func<T, bool>> firstFilter = filters.FirstOrDefault();
if (firstFilter == null)
{
Expression<Func<T, bool>> alwaysTrue = x => true;
return alwaysTrue;
}
var body = firstFilter.Body;
var param = firstFilter.Parameters.ToArray();
foreach (var nextFilter in filters.Skip(1))
{
var nextBody = Expression.Invoke(nextFilter, param);
body = Expression.OrElse(body, nextBody);
}
Expression<Func<T, bool>> result = Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(body, param);
return result;
}
Then later:
Expression<Func<P, bool>> myFilter1 = x => foo1 == true && foo2 == false;
Expression<Func<P, bool>> myFilter2 = x => ... ;
..
List<Expression<Func<P, bool>>> filters = new List<Expression<Func<P, bool>>>();
filters.Add(myfilter1);
filters.Add(myfilter2);
..
Expression<Func<P, bool>> resultFilter = filters.OrTheseFiltersTogether();
IQueryable<P> query = query.Where(resultFilter);

you might want to take a wee look at the Predicatebuilder:
http://www.albahari.com/nutshell/predicatebuilder.aspx
the Predicatebuilder allows you to run up some very powerful expressions (AND/OR/NOT etc, etc) in a very clean and easy to understand way. For simple expressions, I do of course just roll them from scratch and apply but for the complex stuff...
I'm quite a fan of it :)
a few links on SO itself that may be helpful:
LINQ to SQL PredicateBuilder
Generated SQL with PredicateBuilder, LINQPad and operator ANY

.Where method takes a lambda expression as a parameter, so you need to build your BinaryExpression to a complete LambdaExpression.
var resultExpression = Expression.OrElse(myExp1, myExp2);
// now the exp is like: p > 100 || p < 10
ParameterExpression parameterExp = Expression.Parameter(typeof(P),"p");
// construct a parameter with its type P, looks like: p =>
LambdaExpression lambdaExp = Expression.Lambda(resultExpression, parameterExp);
// merge the two expressions: p => p > 100 || p < 10
myList.Where(lambdaExp.Compile());

Its a combination of two Func<P, bool> on expression level.
A less fancy way to do the same should be:
Func<P, bool> myExpression1 = x => foo1 == true && foo2 == false;
Func<P, bool> myExpression2 = x => ... ;
IQueryable<P> l = l.Where((p) => myExpression1(p) || myExpression2(p));