We Keep Coding

Linq group by Chunks [duplicate]

Let's take a class called Cls:
public class Cls
{
public int SequenceNumber { get; set; }
public int Value { get; set; }
}
Now, let's populate some collection with following elements:
Sequence
Number Value
======== =====
1 9
2 9
3 15
4 15
5 15
6 30
7 9
What I need to do, is to enumerate over Sequence Numbers and check if the next element has the same value. If yes, values are aggregated and so, desired output is as following:
Sequence Sequence
Number Number
From To Value
======== ======== =====
1 2 9
3 5 15
6 6 30
7 7 9
How can I perform this operation using LINQ query?

You can use Linq's GroupBy in a modified version which groups only if the two items are adjacent, then it's easy as:
var result = classes
.GroupAdjacent(c => c.Value)
.Select(g => new {
SequenceNumFrom = g.Min(c => c.SequenceNumber),
SequenceNumTo = g.Max(c => c.SequenceNumber),
Value = g.Key
});
foreach (var x in result)
Console.WriteLine("SequenceNumFrom:{0} SequenceNumTo:{1} Value:{2}", x.SequenceNumFrom, x.SequenceNumTo, x.Value);
DEMO
Result:
SequenceNumFrom:1 SequenceNumTo:2 Value:9
SequenceNumFrom:3 SequenceNumTo:5 Value:15
SequenceNumFrom:6 SequenceNumTo:6 Value:30
SequenceNumFrom:7 SequenceNumTo:7 Value:9
This is the extension method to to group adjacent items:
public static IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey, TSource>> GroupAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(
this IEnumerable<TSource> source,
Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector)
{
TKey last = default(TKey);
bool haveLast = false;
List<TSource> list = new List<TSource>();
foreach (TSource s in source)
{
TKey k = keySelector(s);
if (haveLast)
{
if (!k.Equals(last))
{
yield return new GroupOfAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(list, last);
list = new List<TSource>();
list.Add(s);
last = k;
}
else
{
list.Add(s);
last = k;
}
}
else
{
list.Add(s);
last = k;
haveLast = true;
}
}
if (haveLast)
yield return new GroupOfAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(list, last);
}
}
and the class used:
public class GroupOfAdjacent<TSource, TKey> : IEnumerable<TSource>, IGrouping<TKey, TSource>
{
public TKey Key { get; set; }
private List<TSource> GroupList { get; set; }
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return ((System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TSource>)this).GetEnumerator();
}
System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerator<TSource> System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TSource>.GetEnumerator()
{
foreach (var s in GroupList)
yield return s;
}
public GroupOfAdjacent(List<TSource> source, TKey key)
{
GroupList = source;
Key = key;
}
}

You can use this linq query
Demo
var values = (new[] { 9, 9, 15, 15, 15, 30, 9 }).Select((x, i) => new { x, i });
var query = from v in values
let firstNonValue = values.Where(v2 => v2.i >= v.i && v2.x != v.x).FirstOrDefault()
let grouping = firstNonValue == null ? int.MaxValue : firstNonValue.i
group v by grouping into v
select new
{
From = v.Min(y => y.i) + 1,
To = v.Max(y => y.i) + 1,
Value = v.Min(y => y.x)
};

MoreLinq provides this functionality out of the box
It's called GroupAdjacent and is implemented as extension method on IEnumerable:
Groups the adjacent elements of a sequence according to a specified key selector function.
enumerable.GroupAdjacent(e => e.Key)
There is even a Nuget "source" package that contains only that method, if you don't want to pull in an additional binary Nuget package.
The method returns an IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey, TValue>>, so its output can be processed in the same way output from GroupBy would be.

You can do it like this:
var all = new [] {
new Cls(1, 9)
, new Cls(2, 9)
, new Cls(3, 15)
, new Cls(4, 15)
, new Cls(5, 15)
, new Cls(6, 30)
, new Cls(7, 9)
};
var f = all.First();
var res = all.Skip(1).Aggregate(
new List<Run> {new Run {From = f.SequenceNumber, To = f.SequenceNumber, Value = f.Value} }
, (p, v) => {
if (v.Value == p.Last().Value) {
p.Last().To = v.SequenceNumber;
} else {
p.Add(new Run {From = v.SequenceNumber, To = v.SequenceNumber, Value = v.Value});
}
return p;
});
foreach (var r in res) {
Console.WriteLine("{0} - {1} : {2}", r.From, r.To, r.Value);
}
The idea is to use Aggregate creatively: starting with a list consisting of a single Run, examine the content of the list we've got so far at each stage of aggregation (the if statement in the lambda). Depending on the last value, either continue the old run, or start a new one.
Here is a demo on ideone.

I was able to accomplish it by creating a custom extension method.
static class Extensions {
internal static IEnumerable<Tuple<int, int, int>> GroupAdj(this IEnumerable<Cls> enumerable) {
Cls start = null;
Cls end = null;
int value = Int32.MinValue;
foreach (Cls cls in enumerable) {
if (start == null) {
start = cls;
end = cls;
continue;
}
if (start.Value == cls.Value) {
end = cls;
continue;
}
yield return Tuple.Create(start.SequenceNumber, end.SequenceNumber, start.Value);
start = cls;
end = cls;
}
yield return Tuple.Create(start.SequenceNumber, end.SequenceNumber, start.Value);
}
}
Here's the implementation:
static void Main() {
List<Cls> items = new List<Cls> {
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 1, Value = 9 },
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 2, Value = 9 },
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 3, Value = 15 },
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 4, Value = 15 },
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 5, Value = 15 },
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 6, Value = 30 },
new Cls { SequenceNumber = 7, Value = 9 }
};
Console.WriteLine("From To Value");
Console.WriteLine("===== ===== =====");
foreach (var item in items.OrderBy(i => i.SequenceNumber).GroupAdj()) {
Console.WriteLine("{0,-5} {1,-5} {2,-5}", item.Item1, item.Item2, item.Item3);
}
}
And the expected output:
From To Value
===== ===== =====
1 2 9
3 5 15
6 6 30
7 7 9

Here is an implementation without any helper methods:
var grp = 0;
var results =
from i
in
input.Zip(
input.Skip(1).Concat(new [] {input.Last ()}),
(n1, n2) => Tuple.Create(
n1, (n2.Value == n1.Value) ? grp : grp++
)
)
group i by i.Item2 into gp
select new {SequenceNumFrom = gp.Min(x => x.Item1.SequenceNumber),SequenceNumTo = gp.Max(x => x.Item1.SequenceNumber), Value = gp.Min(x => x.Item1.Value)};
The idea is:
Keep track of your own grouping indicator, grp.
Join each item of the collection to the next item in the collection (via Skip(1) and Zip).
If the Values match, they are in the same group; otherwise, increment grp to signal the start of the next group.

Untested dark magic follows. The imperative version seems like it would be easier in this case.
IEnumerable<Cls> data = ...;
var query = data
.GroupBy(x => x.Value)
.Select(g => new
{
Value = g.Key,
Sequences = g
.OrderBy(x => x.SequenceNumber)
.Select((x,i) => new
{
x.SequenceNumber,
OffsetSequenceNumber = x.SequenceNumber - i
})
.GroupBy(x => x.OffsetSequenceNumber)
.Select(g => g
.Select(x => x.SequenceNumber)
.OrderBy(x => x)
.ToList())
.ToList()
})
.SelectMany(x => x.Sequences
.Select(s => new { First = s.First(), Last = s.Last(), x.Value }))
.OrderBy(x => x.First)
.ToList();

Let me propose another option, which yields lazily both sequence of groups and
elements inside groups.
Demonstration in .NET Fiddle
Implementation:
public static class EnumerableExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey, TSource>> GroupAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(
this IEnumerable<TSource> source,
Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector,
IEqualityComparer<TKey>? comparer = null)
{
var comparerOrDefault = comparer ?? EqualityComparer<TKey>.Default;
using var iterator = new Iterator<TSource>(source.GetEnumerator());
iterator.MoveNext();
while (iterator.HasCurrent)
{
var key = keySelector(iterator.Current);
var elements = YieldAdjacentElements(iterator, key, keySelector, comparerOrDefault);
yield return new Grouping<TKey, TSource>(key, elements);
while (iterator.HasCurrentWithKey(key, keySelector, comparerOrDefault))
{
iterator.MoveNext();
}
}
}
static IEnumerable<TSource> YieldAdjacentElements<TKey, TSource>(
Iterator<TSource> iterator,
TKey key,
Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector,
IEqualityComparer<TKey> comparer)
{
while (iterator.HasCurrentWithKey(key, keySelector, comparer))
{
yield return iterator.Current;
iterator.MoveNext();
}
}
private static bool HasCurrentWithKey<TKey, TSource>(
this Iterator<TSource> iterator,
TKey key,
Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector,
IEqualityComparer<TKey> comparer) =>
iterator.HasCurrent && comparer.Equals(keySelector(iterator.Current), key);
private sealed class Grouping<TKey, TElement> : IGrouping<TKey, TElement>
{
public Grouping(TKey key, IEnumerable<TElement> elements)
{
Key = key;
Elements = elements;
}
public TKey Key { get; }
public IEnumerable<TElement> Elements { get; }
public IEnumerator<TElement> GetEnumerator() => Elements.GetEnumerator();
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() => Elements.GetEnumerator();
}
private sealed class Iterator<T> : IDisposable
{
private readonly IEnumerator<T> _enumerator;
public Iterator(IEnumerator<T> enumerator)
{
_enumerator = enumerator;
}
public bool HasCurrent { get; private set; }
public T Current => _enumerator.Current;
public void MoveNext()
{
HasCurrent = _enumerator.MoveNext();
}
public void Dispose()
{
_enumerator.Dispose();
}
}
}
Notice, that it is impossible to achieve such level of laziness with regular GroupBy operation, since it needs to look through the whole collection before yielding the first group.
Particularly, in my case migration from GroupBy to GroupAdjacent in connection with lazy handling of whole pipeline helped to resolve memory consumption issues for large sequences.
In general, GroupAdjacent can be used as lazy and more efficient alternative of GroupBy, provided that input collection satisfies condition, that keys are sorted (or at least not fragmented), and provided that all operations in pipeline are lazy.

Dynamic linq nested group

How can i do dynamic nested group?
let say that i have this example:
result.GroupBy(f => f.level1)
.Select(l1 => new {
name = l1.Key,
children = l1.GroupBy(l2 => l2.level2)
.Select(l2 => new {
name = l2.Key,
children = l2.GroupBy(l3 => l3.level3)
.Select(l3 => new {
name = l3.Key,
children = new someObject()
});
How can i change this to do group dynamically by parameter.
Start from deeper and go on.

If you want to truly dynamically nest this, I would not store the level names as properties in your Level Object, rather I would put them in an array so you can loop through them in some fashion.
Having said that, you can build a general NestedGroupBy<> Linq extension method which can handle what you want to do, you just need to pass a lambda for each level you want:
// The NestedGroupBy<> extension method
public static class LinqExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<TTarget> NestedGroupBy<TSource, TTarget, TKey>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TKey, IEnumerable<TTarget>, TTarget> factory, params Func<TSource, TKey>[] keySelectors)
{
return source.NestedGroupBy(factory, keySelectors, 0);
}
private static IEnumerable<TTarget> NestedGroupBy<TSource, TTarget, TKey>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TKey, IEnumerable<TTarget>, TTarget> factory, Func<TSource, TKey>[] keySelectors, int selectorIndex)
{
// reached the end, just return an empty list
if(selectorIndex >= keySelectors.Length)
{
return new List<TTarget>();
}
// do the GroupBy using the function at index selectorIndex in our list to find the key (level name)
// then call the factory to construct the target SomeObject, passing it the key and the recursive call to NestedGroupBy<>
return source.GroupBy(keySelectors[selectorIndex])
.Select(f => factory(
f.Key,
f.NestedGroupBy(factory, keySelectors, selectorIndex + 1)
)
);
}
}
// source object - assuming your result variable is List<LevelObject>
public class LevelObject
{
public string level1 {get;set;}
public string level2 {get;set;}
public string level3 {get;set;}
public LevelObject(string level1, string level2, string level3)
{
this.level1 = level1;
this.level2 = level2;
this.level3 = level3;
}
}
// target object - what we will end up with in our final list
// the constructor is optional - it just makes the NestedGroupBy<> call cleaner.
public class SomeObject
{
public string name {get; set;}
public IEnumerable<SomeObject> children {get; set;}
public SomeObject(string name, IEnumerable<SomeObject> children)
{
this.name = name;
this.children = children;
}
}
// Sample code to use it. The JToken/JsonConvert call at the end just pretty prints the result on screen.
public static void Main()
{
List<LevelObject> result = new List<LevelObject>()
{
new LevelObject("L1a1", "L2a1", "L3a1"),
new LevelObject("L1a1", "L2a2", "L3a1"),
new LevelObject("L1a1", "L2a1", "L3a2"),
new LevelObject("L1b1", "L2b1", "L3b1"),
new LevelObject("L1c1", "L2c1", "L3c1")
};
/* old way - produces same result
var groupings = result.GroupBy(f => f.level1)
.Select(l1 => new SomeObject {
name = l1.Key,
children = l1.GroupBy(l2 => l2.level2)
.Select(l2 => new SomeObject{
name = l2.Key,
children = l2.GroupBy(l3 => l3.level3)
.Select(l3 => new SomeObject{
name = l3.Key,
children = new List<SomeObject>()
})})}).ToList();
*/
var groupings = result.NestedGroupBy<LevelObject, SomeObject, string>(
(key, children) => new SomeObject(key, children),
l => l.level1, l => l.level2, l => l.level3
).ToList();
Console.WriteLine(groupings.GetType());
Console.WriteLine(JToken.Parse(JsonConvert.SerializeObject(groupings)));
}

Write similar logic using generics

I have the following method which determines which cars I need to delete from the DB.
private List<CarDTO> BuildCarsToDelete(IList<CarDTO> newCars, IList<CarDTO> existingCars)
{
var missingCars = new List<CarDTO>();
var cars = newCars.Select(c => c.CarId);
var newCarIds = new HashSet<int>(cars);
foreach (var car in existingCars)
{
//If there are no new cars then it had some and they have been removed
if (newCars.Count() == 0)
{
missingCars.Add(car);
}
else
{
if (!newCarIds.Contains(car.CarId))
{
missingCars.Add(car);
}
}
}
return missingCars;
}
This works as I want - but if I want to achieve the same functionality for Customers or Apartments of other DTOs I will be copying a pasting the code but only changing the variable names and the Type of DTO around - is there a nicer way possible using generics which would keep the algorithm and logic as it is but allow me to use on any DTO?

If all the ids are of type int then you can do that by passing in a Func to determine the id.
private List<T> BuildToDelete<T>(
IList<T> newItems,
IList<T> existingItems,
Func<T, int> getId)
{
var missingItems = new List<T>();
var items = newItems.Select(getId);
var newItemIds = new HashSet<int>(items);
foreach (var item in existingItems)
{
if (newItems.Count() == 0)
{
missingItems.Add(item);
}
else
{
if (!newItemIds.Contains(getId(item)))
{
missingItems.Add(item);
}
}
}
return missingItems;
}
Then call as shown below:
var results = BuildToDelete(newCars, existingCars, c => c.CarId);

Assuming you use the interface approach mentioned in comments, a generic version could look something like this:
private List<TEntity> BuildEntitiesToDelete(IList<TEntity> newEntities, IList<TEntity> existingEntities) where TEntity : IEntityWithId
{
var missingEntities = new List<TEntity>();
var entities = newEntities.Select(e => e.Id);
var newEntityIds = new HashSet<int>(entities);
foreach (var entity in existingEntities)
{
if (entities.Count() == 0)
{
missingEntities.Add(entity);
}
else
{
if (!newEntityIds.Contains(entity.Id))
{
missingEntities.Add(entity);
}
}
}
return missingEntities;
}
IEntityWithId is probably a poor name for the interface, but I'll leave picking a better name up to you.

Try something cleaner:
1) create flexible equality comparer (need to add some null checking etc.)
public class FuncEqualityComparer<T> : IEqualityComparer<T>
{
Func<T, T, bool> comparer;
Func<T, int> hash;
public FuncEqualityComparer (Func<T, T, bool> comparer, Func<T, int> hash)
{
this.comparer = comparer;
this.hash = hash;
}
public bool Equals (T x, T y) => comparer (x, y);
public int GetHashCode (T obj) => hash (obj);
}
2) and now, just simply:
var carComparerByID = new FuncEqualityComparer<CarDTO> ((a, b) => a.CarId == b.CarId, x => x.CarId.GetHashCode ());
var result = existingCars.Except (newCars, carComparerByID).ToList ();

Merge elements in list by property

Context
I have a list of time intervals. Time interval type is HistoMesures.
Each HistoMesure is defined by a Debut (begin) property, a Fin (end) property, and a Commentaires (a little note) property.
My list is made in such a way that :
All HistoMesure are exclusive, I mean that they can't be overlapping each other.
The list is sorted by Debut, so by the beggining of the interval.
Edit : All HistoMesure are contiguous in this configuration.
Question
I want to merge (transform two little intervals in one big interval) all adjacent HistoMesure which have the same Commentaires. Currently I achieve this that way :
//sortedHistos type is List<HistoMesure>
int i = 0;
while (i < sortedHistos.Count - 1)
{
if (sortedHistos[i].Commentaires == sortedHistos[i + 1].Commentaires)
{
sortedHistos[i].Fin = sortedHistos[i + 1].Fin;
sortedHistos.RemoveAt(i + 1);
}
else
{
++i;
}
}
But I feel that it exists a more elegant way to do this, maybe with LINQ. Do you have any suggestion ?

Your solution works fine, I would keep it.
Don't try too hard to use LINQ if it doesn't match your requirements. LINQ is great to write queries (this is the Q of LINQ), not so great to modify existing lists.

This code will produce overlapping merged intervals. I.e. if you have intervals A, B, C where A and C have same commentaries, result will be AC, B:
var result = from h in sortedHistos
group h by h.Commentaires into g
select new HistoMesure {
Debut = g.First().Debut, // thus you have sorted entries
Fin = g.Last().Fin,
Commentaires = g.Key
};
You can use Min and Max if intervals are not sorted.
UPDATE: There is no default LINQ operator which allows you to create adjacent groups. But you always can create one. Here is IEnumerable<T> extension (I skipped arguments check):
public static IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey, TElement>> GroupAdjacent<TKey, TElement>(
this IEnumerable<TElement> source, Func<TElement, TKey> keySelector)
{
using (var iterator = source.GetEnumerator())
{
if(!iterator.MoveNext())
{
yield break;
}
else
{
var comparer = Comparer<TKey>.Default;
var group = new Grouping<TKey, TElement>(keySelector(iterator.Current));
group.Add(iterator.Current);
while(iterator.MoveNext())
{
TKey key = keySelector(iterator.Current);
if (comparer.Compare(key, group.Key) != 0)
{
yield return group;
group = new Grouping<TKey, TElement>(key);
}
group.Add(iterator.Current);
}
if (group.Any())
yield return group;
}
}
}
This extension creates groups of adjacent elements which have same key value. Unfortunately all implementations of IGrouping in .NET are internal, so you need yours:
public class Grouping<TKey, TElement> : IGrouping<TKey, TElement>
{
private List<TElement> elements = new List<TElement>();
public Grouping(TKey key)
{
Key = key;
}
public TKey Key { get; private set; }
public IEnumerator<TElement> GetEnumerator()
{
return elements.GetEnumerator();
}
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return GetEnumerator();
}
public void Add(TElement element)
{
elements.Add(element);
}
}
And now your code will look like:
var result = sortedHistos.GroupAdjacent(h => h.Commentaries)
.Select(g => new HistoMesure {
Debut = g.Min(h => h.Debut),
Fin = g.Max(h => h.Fin),
Commentaries = g.Key
});

Using Linq and borrowing from this article to group by adjacent values, this should work:
Your query:
var filteredHistos = sortedHistos
.GroupAdjacent(h => h.Commentaires)
.Select(g => new HistoMesure
{
Debut = g.First().Debut,
Fin = g.Last().Fin,
Commentaires = g.Key
});
And copying from the article, the rest of the code to group by:
public class GroupOfAdjacent<TSource, TKey> : IEnumerable<TSource>, IGrouping<TKey, TSource>
{
public TKey Key { get; set; }
private List<TSource> GroupList { get; set; }
System.Collections.IEnumerator System.Collections.IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return ((System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TSource>)this).GetEnumerator();
}
System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerator<TSource> System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable<TSource>.GetEnumerator()
{
foreach (var s in GroupList)
yield return s;
}
public GroupOfAdjacent(List<TSource> source, TKey key)
{
GroupList = source;
Key = key;
}
}
public static class LocalExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<IGrouping<TKey, TSource>> GroupAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(
this IEnumerable<TSource> source,
Func<TSource, TKey> keySelector)
{
TKey last = default(TKey);
bool haveLast = false;
List<TSource> list = new List<TSource>();
foreach (TSource s in source)
{
TKey k = keySelector(s);
if (haveLast)
{
if (!k.Equals(last))
{
yield return new GroupOfAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(list, last);
list = new List<TSource>();
list.Add(s);
last = k;
}
else
{
list.Add(s);
last = k;
}
}
else
{
list.Add(s);
last = k;
haveLast = true;
}
}
if (haveLast)
yield return new GroupOfAdjacent<TSource, TKey>(list, last);
}
}

If I understood you correctly, you need something like this:
var mergedMesures = mesures
.GroupBy(_ => _.Commentaires)
.Select(_ => new HistoMesures
{
Debut = _.Min(item => item.Debut),
Fin = _.Max(item => item.Fin),
Commentaires = _.Key
});

How to get the index of an element in an IEnumerable?

I wrote this:
public static class EnumerableExtensions
{
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> obj, T value)
{
return obj
.Select((a, i) => (a.Equals(value)) ? i : -1)
.Max();
}
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> obj, T value
, IEqualityComparer<T> comparer)
{
return obj
.Select((a, i) => (comparer.Equals(a, value)) ? i : -1)
.Max();
}
}
But I don't know if it already exists, does it?

I'd question the wisdom, but perhaps:
source.TakeWhile(x => x != value).Count();
(using EqualityComparer<T>.Default to emulate != if needed) - but you need to watch to return -1 if not found... so perhaps just do it the long way
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, T value)
{
int index = 0;
var comparer = EqualityComparer<T>.Default; // or pass in as a parameter
foreach (T item in source)
{
if (comparer.Equals(item, value)) return index;
index++;
}
return -1;
}

The whole point of getting things out as IEnumerable is so you can lazily iterate over the contents. As such, there isn't really a concept of an index. What you are doing really doesn't make a lot of sense for an IEnumerable. If you need something that supports access by index, put it in an actual list or collection.

I would implement it like this:
public static class EnumerableExtensions
{
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> obj, T value)
{
return obj.IndexOf(value, null);
}
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> obj, T value, IEqualityComparer<T> comparer)
{
comparer = comparer ?? EqualityComparer<T>.Default;
var found = obj
.Select((a, i) => new { a, i })
.FirstOrDefault(x => comparer.Equals(x.a, value));
return found == null ? -1 : found.i;
}
}

The way I'm currently doing this is a bit shorter than those already suggested and as far as I can tell gives the desired result:
var index = haystack.ToList().IndexOf(needle);
It's a bit clunky, but it does the job and is fairly concise.

I think the best option is to implement like this:
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> enumerable, T element, IEqualityComparer<T> comparer = null)
{
int i = 0;
comparer = comparer ?? EqualityComparer<T>.Default;
foreach (var currentElement in enumerable)
{
if (comparer.Equals(currentElement, element))
{
return i;
}
i++;
}
return -1;
}
It will also not create the anonymous object

The best way to catch the position is by FindIndex This function is available only for List<>
Example
int id = listMyObject.FindIndex(x => x.Id == 15);
If you have enumerator or array use this way
int id = myEnumerator.ToList().FindIndex(x => x.Id == 15);
or
int id = myArray.ToList().FindIndex(x => x.Id == 15);

A bit late in the game, i know... but this is what i recently did. It is slightly different than yours, but allows the programmer to dictate what the equality operation needs to be (predicate). Which i find very useful when dealing with different types, since i then have a generic way of doing it regardless of object type and <T> built in equality operator.
It also has a very very small memory footprint, and is very, very fast/efficient... if you care about that.
At worse, you'll just add this to your list of extensions.
Anyway... here it is.
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<T, bool> predicate)
{
int retval = -1;
var enumerator = source.GetEnumerator();
while (enumerator.MoveNext())
{
retval += 1;
if (predicate(enumerator.Current))
{
IDisposable disposable = enumerator as System.IDisposable;
if (disposable != null) disposable.Dispose();
return retval;
}
}
IDisposable disposable = enumerator as System.IDisposable;
if (disposable != null) disposable.Dispose();
return -1;
}
Hopefully this helps someone.

A few years later, but this uses Linq, returns -1 if not found, doesn't create extra objects, and should short-circuit when found [as opposed to iterating over the entire IEnumerable]:
public static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> list, T item)
{
return list.Select((x, index) => EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(item, x)
? index
: -1)
.FirstOr(x => x != -1, -1);
}
Where 'FirstOr' is:
public static T FirstOr<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, T alternate)
{
return source.DefaultIfEmpty(alternate)
.First();
}
public static T FirstOr<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source, Func<T, bool> predicate, T alternate)
{
return source.Where(predicate)
.FirstOr(alternate);
}

Stumbled across this today in a search for answers and I thought I'd add my version to the list (No pun intended). It utlises the null conditional operator of c#6.0
IEnumerable<Item> collection = GetTheCollection();
var index = collection
.Select((item,idx) => new { Item = item, Index = idx })
//or .FirstOrDefault(_ => _.Item.Prop == something)
.FirstOrDefault(_ => _.Item == itemToFind)?.Index ?? -1;
I've done some 'racing of the old horses' (testing) and for large collections (~100,000), worst case scenario that item you want is at the end, this is 2x faster than doing ToList().FindIndex(). If the Item you want is in the middle its ~4x faster.
For smaller collections (~10,000) it seems to be only marginally faster
Heres how I tested it https://gist.github.com/insulind/16310945247fcf13ba186a45734f254e

An alternative to finding the index after the fact is to wrap the Enumerable, somewhat similar to using the Linq GroupBy() method.
public static class IndexedEnumerable
{
public static IndexedEnumerable<T> ToIndexed<T>(this IEnumerable<T> items)
{
return IndexedEnumerable<T>.Create(items);
}
}
public class IndexedEnumerable<T> : IEnumerable<IndexedEnumerable<T>.IndexedItem>
{
private readonly IEnumerable<IndexedItem> _items;
public IndexedEnumerable(IEnumerable<IndexedItem> items)
{
_items = items;
}
public class IndexedItem
{
public IndexedItem(int index, T value)
{
Index = index;
Value = value;
}
public T Value { get; private set; }
public int Index { get; private set; }
}
public static IndexedEnumerable<T> Create(IEnumerable<T> items)
{
return new IndexedEnumerable<T>(items.Select((item, index) => new IndexedItem(index, item)));
}
public IEnumerator<IndexedItem> GetEnumerator()
{
return _items.GetEnumerator();
}
IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator()
{
return GetEnumerator();
}
}
Which gives a use case of:
var items = new[] {1, 2, 3};
var indexedItems = items.ToIndexed();
foreach (var item in indexedItems)
{
Console.WriteLine("items[{0}] = {1}", item.Index, item.Value);
}

This can get really cool with an extension (functioning as a proxy), for example:
collection.SelectWithIndex();
// vs.
collection.Select((item, index) => item);
Which will automagically assign indexes to the collection accessible via this Index property.
Interface:
public interface IIndexable
{
int Index { get; set; }
}
Custom extension (probably most useful for working with EF and DbContext):
public static class EnumerableXtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<TModel> SelectWithIndex<TModel>(
this IEnumerable<TModel> collection) where TModel : class, IIndexable
{
return collection.Select((item, index) =>
{
item.Index = index;
return item;
});
}
}
public class SomeModelDTO : IIndexable
{
public Guid Id { get; set; }
public string Name { get; set; }
public decimal Price { get; set; }
public int Index { get; set; }
}
// In a method
var items = from a in db.SomeTable
where a.Id == someValue
select new SomeModelDTO
{
Id = a.Id,
Name = a.Name,
Price = a.Price
};
return items.SelectWithIndex()
.OrderBy(m => m.Name)
.Skip(pageStart)
.Take(pageSize)
.ToList();

Try this:
static int FindIndex<T>(this IEnumerable<T> a, Predicate<T> f) =>
a.TakeWhile(x => !f(x)).Count();
static int IndexOf<T>(this IEnumerable<T> a, T value) =>
a.FindIndex(x => EqualityComparer<T>.Default.Equals(x, value));
var i = new[] { 1, 2, 3 }.IndexOf(2); // 1