We Keep Coding

using lambda, how to apply an existing function to all elements of a list?

Excuse me, a quick question:
I have a list of strings, string are full paths of some files. I would like to get only the filename without the path neither the extension for each string (and to understand lambda more)
Based on the lambda expression in How to bind a List to a DataGridView control? I am trying something like the below:
FilesName = Directory.GetFiles(fbd.SelectedPath).ToList(); // full path
List<string> FilesNameWithoutPath = AllVideosFileNames.ForEach(x => Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension(x)); // I want only the filename
AllVideosGrid.DataSource = FilesNameWithoutPath.ConvertAll(x => new { Value = x }); // to then bind it with the grid
The error is:
Can not convert void() to List of string
So I want to apply Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension() for each string in FilesName. And would appreciate any extra description on how Lamba works in this case.

ForEach will execute some code on each item in your list, but will not return anything (see: List<T>.ForEach Method). What you want to do is Select the result of the method (see: Enumerable.Select<TSource, TResult> Method), which would look something like:
List<string> FilesNameWithoutPath = AllVideosFileNames
.Select(x => Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension(x))
.ToList();

You are using List<T>.ForEach method which takes each element in the list and applies the given function to them, but it doesn't return anything. So what you are doing basically is getting each file name and throwing them away.
What you need is a Select instead of ForEach:
var fileNamesWithoutPath = AllVideosFileNames
.Select(x => Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension(x))
.ToList();
AllVideosGrid.DataSource = fileNamesWithoutPath;
This will project each item, apply Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension to them and return the result, then you put that result into a list by ToList.
Note that you can also shorten the Select using a method group without declaring a lambda variable:
.Select(Path.GetFileNameWithoutExtension)

How do I refresh an array full of returned values of method calls?

In C#, I have a string array that I have written full full of "getter" method calls. They call methods in another class so that the array is populated with the needed strings. It looks something like this:
string[] mCalls = {c.get1(), c.get2(), c.get3()};
I'm sure this situation could apply to any program. However, in my program the variables these methods return are initially set with the string "Unchecked" - thus filling this example array with Unchecked 3 times. As my program goes on and things are checked, the values of the string variables get changed within the class they're in. I've been simply re-calling the getter methods at appropriate times to change what's in my array, like this:
mCalls[0] = c.get1();
mCalls[1] = c.get2();
mCalls[2] = c.get3();
I don't really like this. It seems inevitable that one day I'll have to change something, and if that happens I will have to manually do the tedious work of changing all of the indexing throughout my program. If this happens to be the best way I'm fine with that, but I assume there are better ways. So, in any case, is there a way to "refresh" the values in an array that is set up like this? And if so, what is it?

You want something like this:
public string[] MCalls
{
get
{
return new string[]{c.get1(), c.get2(), c.get3()};
}
private set;
}
and then use MCalls as if it is a regular variable whenever you want to access the arrays

You could change your array to contain functions instead of strings like this:
Func<string>[] mCalls = { c.get1, c.get2, c.get3...};
And then use it this way:
string c2 = mCalls[1]();
But note that this way every access is a method call. I'm not sure what you are really trying to achieve, there may be better overall designs than this approach.

Couple of options:
Create an array of lambdas:
var mCalls = new Func<object, string>[] {
(object o) => o.ToString() ,
(object o) => o.GetHashCode().ToString(),
(object o) => o.GetType().ToString(),
};
If the input to each lambda is the same you can create a lambda that returns an array:
Func<object, string[]> GetValues = (object o) => new string[]
{
o.ToString() ,
o.GetHashCode().ToString(),
o.GetType().ToString(),
};
Then just reload the array by calling the lambda:
mCalls = GetValues(c);
Note that it isn't technically refreshing the array, it's creating a new array. If you need to keep the array the same but just update the values you'd ned to loop through the array and assign the values by index.

What you could do is loop thorugh with reflection and get all methods from the class and from here you can get a list of method names. With this list you can assign to an array or run the methods by name or whatever. You can also filter the list to get your specific method names only:
var methodNames = typeof(MyClass).GetMethods(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Static)
.Select(x => x.Name)
.Distinct()
.OrderBy(x => x);
To call the methods:
foreach(var method in methodNames)
{
typeof(MyClass).GetMethod(method).Invoke(t, new[] { "world" });
}

LINQ to SQL where clause verifying string contains list element

I'm using a view returning Domains according to an id. The Domains column can be 'Geography' or can be stuffed domains 'Geography,History'. (In any way, the data returned is a VARCHAR)
In my C# code, I have a list containing main domains:
private static List<string> _mainDomains = new List<string>()
{
"Geography",
"Mathematics",
"English"
};
I want to filter my LINQ query in order to return only data related to one or many main Domain:
expression = i => _mainDomains.Any(s => i.Domains.Contains(s));
var results = (from v_lq in context.my_view
select v_lq).Where(expression)
The problem is I can't use the Any key word, nor the Exists keyword, since they aren't available in SQL. I've seen many solutions using the Contains keyword, but it doesn't fit to my problem.
What should I do?

You can use contains:
where i.Domains.Any(s => _mainDomains.Contains<string>(s.xxx))
Notice that the generic arguments are required (even if Resharper might tell you they are not). They are required to select Enumerable.Contains, not List.Contains. The latter one is not translatable (which I consider an error in the L2S product design).
(I might not have gotten the query exactly right for your data model. Please just adapt it to your needs).

I figured it out. Since I can't use the Any keyword, I used this function:
public static bool ContainsAny(this string databaseString, List<string> stringList)
{
if (databaseString == null)
{
return false;
}
foreach (string s in stringList)
{
if (databaseString.Contains(s))
{
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
So then I can use this expression in my Where clause:
expression = i => i.Domains.ContainsAny(_mainDomains);
Update:
According to usr, the query would return all the values and execute the where clause server side. A better solution would be to use a different approach (and not use stuffed/comma-separated values)

Apply Linq Func<T, TResult> key selector at single element level

Sorry if the title is misleading, wasn't sure how to describe this one.
My end goal is to have an extension method of IQueryable<T> and some form (see below for example) of expression that will allow me to have to return an IQueryable<EntityIndex<T>> (or similar) which contains the original T in the Entity field, and an array/ienumerable containing the elements as describe by the some form of expression.
I know that doesn't really make sense, hopefully it will after an example...
This is what I have so far:
class EntityIndex<T, TKey>
{
T Entity { get; set; }
// Doesn't have to be IEnumerable, whatever is easier
IEnuermable<TKey> Index { get; set; }
}
static class Elsewhere
{
[Extension()]
public IQueryable<EntityIndex<T, TKey>> IndexBy<T, TKey>(this IQueryable<T> source, Expression<Func<T, TKey[]>> indexSelector)
{
return source.Select(n => new EntityIndex<T, TKey> {
Entity = n,
Index = new T[] { n }.Select(indexSelector)
});
}
}
Note: The above does not compile, it's simply there to try and show what I'm trying to achieve.
I've used the standard selector, but sub-optimally, had to arbitrarily create an array of T on the assignment to the 'Index' property to be able to apply the selector. I'm hoping a better choice of parameter may resolve this, but possibly not. The main issue is this doesn't compile so if there is a minor tweak that will allow it to work that's fine by me, if you can understand my gibberish and understand what I'm trying to do, and happen to know a better way to go about it I'd be greatly appreciative.
Ideally, I need the solution to be understood by the L2S engine, which I'm not convinced the above is thanks to the introduction of the EntityIndex class, but I'm holding out hope that it'll treat it as an anonymous class.
EDIT:
Good point Damien, the bigger picture is probably much easier to describe...
I want an extension method that accepts an expression, the expression should describe which fields on the entity to index, which will be used after this particular expression to allow a criterion (where clause) to be applied to the selected fields.
Long story short, in a number of places in code we have a wildcard string search. If I have an EntityA with Property1, Property2, Property3, etc, it is not uncommon to see code such as:
Handwritten, please excuse minor typos
public string[] WildcardSearch(string prefixText, int count)
{
string searchTerm = prefixText.Replace(wildcard, string.Empty);
if (prefixText.StartsWith(wildcard) && prefixText.EndsWith(wildcard)) {
return entitySet.Where(n => n.Property1.Contains(searchTerm) || n.Property2.Contains(searchTerm)).Select(n => n.Property3).ToArray();
} else if (prefixText.StartsWith(wildcard)) {
return entitySet.Where(n => n.Property1.EndsWith(searchTerm) || n.Property2.EndsWith(searchTerm)).Select(n => n.Property3).ToArray();
// you get the picture, same with EndsWith, no wildcards defaults to contains...
}
}
EDIT:
Further clarification - using the above WildcardEarch as an example, what I was hoping for was to be able to have a selector as follows or similar:
Func<EntityA, IEnumerable<string>> indexSelector = n => new string[] {
n.Property1,
n.Property2
};
// Alternatively, a ParamArray of keySelector might work?
Func<EntityA, string>[] keySelectors = new Func<EntityA, string>[] {
n => n.Property1,
n => n.Property2
};
Given an adequate expression describing which fields on the entity to search, returning the IQueryable<EntitySearch<T>> as shown above, I hoped to be able to apply a single criterion, similar to:
Func<EntitySearch<T>, bool> criterion = n => false;
if (wildcardIsContains) {
criterion = n => n.Values.Any(x => x.Contains(searchTerm));
} else if (wildCardIsStartsWith) {
criterion = n => n.Values.Any(x => x.Contains(searchTerm));
//etc
}
Given the extension at the very top that I can't get to work, and this criterion logic, I should be able to take an IQueryable<T>, select some fields, and apply an appropriate wildcard search on the fields, finally returning IQueryable<T> again having added the filtering.
Thanks¬!
Please comment if you need more information/clarification...
EDIT:
Fair one #subkamren and thanks for the interest. Some non-generic examples may be of use. I'll draft something up and add them shortly. For the time being, some clarification based on your comment...
Given an IQueryable<Animal> I want an extension allowing me to select fields on Animal which I intend to search/index by. For example, Animal.Description, Animal.Species.Name etc. This extension should return something like an IIndexedQueryable<Animal>. That is the issue I'm trying to deal with in the question above. The wider picture mentioned, which I'd be exceptionally pleased if you're willing to help with, is as follows:
The IIndexedQueryable<T> interface in turn I would like an extension for which could take a string search term. The extension should resolve the wildcards within the search term, extend the original IQueryable with the necessary criterion to perform a search on the indexed fields, and return an IQueryable<T> again.
I appreciate this could be done in a single step, but I hoped to do it this way so that later on I can look into adding a third extension method applicable to IIndexedQueryable<T> allowing me to perform a freetext search with SQL Server... ^^ Make any sense?
That's the bigger picture at least, this question deals primarily with being able to specify the fields I aim to index in such a way I can use them thereafter as mentioned here.

So something like:
public static IEnumerable<EntityIndex<T, Y>> IndexBy<T, Y>(this IEnumerable<T> entities, Func<T, Y> indexSelector) {
return entities.Select(e => new EntityIndex<T, Y> { Entity = e, IndexValue = indexSelector(e) });
}
Noting that generically defining EntityIndex with the TIndexType (called Y here) is important because you don't know ahead of time what the index is. The use of a generic allows Y to be an enumeration, thus the following would work as an index selector:
// Assuming Animal has attributes "Kingdom", "Phylum", "Family", "Genus", "Species"
// this returns an enumeration of EntityIndex<Animal, String[]>
var animalsClassified = someAnimals.IndexBy(a => new String[] { a.Kingdom, a.Phylum, a.Family, a.Genus, a.Species });
EDIT (Adding further detail):
Using the above, you can group the results by unique index value:
var animalClassifications = animalsClassified
.SelectMany(ac => ac.IndexValue.Select(iv => new { IndexValue = iv, Entity = ac.Entity }))
.GroupBy(kvp => kvp.IndexValue)
What I've described here, by the way, is (a very simplified form of) the MapReduce algorithm as popularized by Google. A distributed form of the same is commonly used for keyword identification in text search, where you want to build an index of (search term)->(list of containing documents).

Is this overusing extension methods?

I'm looking to make certain functions as generic as possible.
In my MVC applications I have to convert a number of complex IEnumerable objects to SelectLists for dropdown display etc.
At first I created a static List class with conversion methods for each complex object. This amounted to a lot of code. I next started using linq statements to do the conversion:
var list = (from o in SessionTypes select new SelectListItem { Value = o.ID.ToString(), Text = o.Title }).ToList();
but again, this still was a lot of code when taken over many such conversions.
I finally settled something similar to:
public IEnumerable<SelectListItem> ToSelectList<T>(IEnumerable<T> enumerable, Func<T, string> value, Func<T, string> text)
{
return enumerable.Select(f => new SelectListItem()
{
Value = value(f),
Text = text(f),
});
}
and to make it easier to use, I made it an extension method:
public static IEnumerable<SelectListItem> ToSelectList<T>(this IEnumerable<T> enumerable, Func<T, string> value, Func<T, string> text)
{
return enumerable.Select(f => new SelectListItem()
{
Value = value(f),
Text = text(f),
});
}
So now, all I have to do is:
var list = SessionTypes.ToSelectList(o => o.ID.ToString(), o => o.Title) as List<SelectListItem>;
I have similar methods such as .ToDictionary too.
Is this overusing Extension methods? I worry that I'm hiding too much code away in extension methods which might be distorting my models, would it be better to use linq conversions for transparency?

You can bind IDictionary<,> to the DropDownList DataSource directly, in WebForms you need to specify mappings like DataValueField="Key" and DataTextField="Value". Considering that why not just use LINQ ToDictionary() method?
dropDownList.DataValueField = "Key";
dropDownList.DataTextField = "Value";
dropDownList.DataSource =
SessionTypes.ToDictionary(k => k.ID.ToString(),
v => v.Title);

This guideline is from C# in Depth :
"An extension method is reasonably valid if it's applicable to all
instances of the extended type. If it's only appropriate in certain
situations, then make it clear that the method is not part of type by
leaving it as a "normal" static method".
As long as you are okey in exposing this extension method on all instances of type IEnumerable, then you are good to go.
On a lighter note, I would rather call the extension method as ToSelectListItem, rather than ToSelectList, to make it clear for the end user. Again this is my personal preference.

This is a perfectly acceptable usage of extension methods.
So long as they are descriptively named and do what they say you should not have problems.