We Keep Coding

SQLite bitwise query to EF Core Linq version?

So, I know my SQL much better than my EF Core linq, so my starting query was just a FromSQL like this:
var links = context.PortalLinks.FromSql("SELECT * FROM portal_link WHERE grant_bits & {0} AND linkSet_id={1} ORDER BY sortKey",claim,0).ToList();
Now I am trying to translate it into the proper linq style query
var links = context.PortalLinks.Where(x => ((x.GrantBits & claim) != 0) && x.LinkSetId == 0).OrderBy(s => s.SortKey);
I've come up with this, but I am not happy that I am being forced to explicitly test for !=0 when in SQL that is implicit, and while this instance is harmless I can imagine other cases where there can be a more ... amusing ... mismatch between what I can express in C# and what I want to express in SQL.
I guess, is there some other way to express more idiomatic SQL queries for Linq to parse thats less bound by c#'s own assumptions as to what constitutes valid logic?

I am trying to figure what you mean by idiomatic... you can use string interpolation of C# 6.0 inside the query and pass your var:
var links = context.PortalLinks.Where(x => ((x.GrantBits & claim) != Int32.Parse($"{myVar}")) && x.LinkSetId == Int32.Parse($"{myVar2}").OrderBy(s => s.SortKey);
Notice that I use string interpolation as there will be no easy way to achieve this logic with an integer.
you can relate to this post for another source of information.
Edit:
Now that I understand your question I can address your inquiry:
What you describe isn't going to work with native LINQ functionality however!
there is this library which will help you extend the dynamic linq and achieve your goal:
Dynamic LINQ

Linq To SQL: Sort Query by Arbitrary Property(Column) Name

I have a larger/more complex problem, but for simplicity sake, let us consider the following:
Let us say that I have table in the SQL DataBase called Product, having two columns, ID (int, primary key) and Name (varchar/string). I also have a simple LINQ DataContext.
I have a query constructed and handed to “my” function. Let us say it is something like: (though it may be a bit more complex)
IQueryable<Product> query = from p in db.Products select p;
Once my method gets this query, passed in as a parameter, it has to change the sort order e.g.
IQueryable<Product> sortedQuery = query.OrderBy(x => x.Name);
I would like to make this more generic i.e. to specify the field to sort on. Normally, I can do a switch statement that takes a string. However I would like to know if there is a way to pass the parameter directly. I intend to extend this to other Database tables, so these switch statements would get tedious.
I was trying something like:
IQueryable<Product> sortedQuery = query.OrderBy(x => (typeof(Product)).GetProperty(“Name”));
But this does not work. I also want to ensure that the LINQ to SQL is maintained i.e. the sort to be done on the SQL Server. Hence if I debug, I should get a SQL query from this LINQ query.
Thank you in advance for your help.

You could use Dynamic Linq for this purpose.
See here Dynamic LINQ (Part 1: Using the LINQ Dynamic Query Library)
Then you can make calls like this:
var query = DBContext.Users.Where( "Age > 3" ).OrderBy( "Name asc" );

Try this out instead:
query.OrderBy(x => x.GetType().GetProperty(“Name”).GetValue(x, null));
You can't just grab the property. You need to grab the value off of that property, hence the call to GetValue.

It is not as easy as it seems. The LINQ to SQL engine parses the expression you pass to the OrderBy method in order to obtain the name of the property you are referencing, then uses this information to compose a plain SQL order by clause.
I guess that maybe it can be done by using reflection, anyway. Maybe you can get something useful from the accepted answer of this SO question.

LINQ - Remove Parts of Expression Tree

I have the following LINQ query:
var query = session.Query<Event>()
.Fetch(e => e.Venue); // Fetch is an IQueryable extension which does a join
// Code needed here to remove the fetch part
var num = query.Count(); // This then hits the database
Unfortunately this throws an error as fetch is not supported for a count method. At this stage i'm sure you're thinking why don't i remove the fetch part. However i have simplified my example and this is not possible. What i'd ideally like to be able to do is navigate the expression tree for the LINQ query and remove any calls to Fetch before i call Count.
I'd appreciate it if someone could show how this is possible. Thanks

It is possible to change expression trees at runtime (by building a new one out of the existing one), since O/RM tools such as LINQ to SQL and Entity Framework do this constantly, but it's not really easy. It has become easier with the introduction of the ExpressionVisitor class of .NET 4.0, but still don't expect it to be simple.
Here is an article that shows an example of this.

Would it help to convert the query to an Enumerable and call Count() on this like this:
var num = query.AsEnumerable().Count();
This would execute the query and afterwards makes a simple Count() on the result instead of letting the Count() flow into the ExpressionTree.

How to create LINQ Query from string?

I am new at LINQ and really need a help with some coding.
At the moment, I have a string and a var variables.
string temp = "from product in myEntities.Products where product.Name.Contains(_Name) select product";
var _Products = temp;
LvProducts.DataSource = _Products;
LvProducts.DataBind();
Basically, what I want to do is to be able to create a custom/complicated LINQ query by assigning it into a string beforehand. After done with composing, I assign the string into the var variable. However, this is obviously will not work. Therefore, can anyone assist me on this?

You have a few options:
Use the the Dynamic Linq
libraries to construct you queries on
the fly. The best place to get
started is by reading ScottGu's blog
entry. However, I don't think
these libraries support the contains
method in your example. Here is
a blog post explaining how to add
this support.
Directly execute SQL statements. Check out the MSDN docs for Linq to Sql or Linq to Entities.
var _Products = myEntities.ExecuteStoreQuery<Product>
(#"SELECT * FROM Products WHERE [Name] In ('Item1', 'Item2')");
Use Linq's composable behaviour. This might not be the most elegant solution but it works really well if you do not have too many options. You can just construct your query in multiple parts.
var _Products = from product in myEntities.Products
select product
_Products = from product in _Products
where product.Name.Contains(_Name)
select product
if FilterByPrice {
_Products = from product in _Products
where product.Price > 100
select product
}

You can do this by compiling this Linq within some c# using the CodeDomProvider - Adding scripting functionality to .NET applications - but this is quite heavyweight as a solution. If you want to see more about how to do this, then take a look at LinqPad - http://www.linqpad.net - the author invites you to use the decompiler to see how it works!
If the requirement is just down to simple where clauses than an alternative might be to use Dynamic Linq - see Scott Gu's posts and the sample code from Microsoft - http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2008/01/07/dynamic-linq-part-1-using-the-linq-dynamic-query-library.aspx

Maybe this can help you
http://nlinq.codeplex.com/
BR.

Much of the reason you use LINQ in the first place is to get compiler-verified queries, that wil ldetect errors at compile time. This will defeat that purpose since the string will be parsed at runtime.
For your needs you have two options:
1) Making a eSQL query and running it on the ObjectContext. Using this, you can still use your entities like myEntities.Products, and return a list of products.
2) Using a normal SQL query, and use the ObjectContext to call that directly towards the underlying database.

My guess is that you will have to use dynamic code execution. For further details, have a look at Ricks post on west-wind.

you're thinking of it like a Dynamic SQL where you create the statement as string and parse it as a SQL statement.
Since you're already in the code, why not make the statements right in there. It would be a lot easier if you use Lambda instead of the traditional linq. my 2 cents.

c# Fluent SQL Helper - Syntax improvement

I'm writing a little library to help building SQL requests (only doing SELECTs for the moment) but I'm not satisfied with an aspect of the syntax, here's an exemple to explain:
var db = FluentDb.WithConnectionString("SqlCeTest");
var query = db.From("Customers")
.Where(FS.Col("Age") > 18 & FS.Col("Name").StartsWith("L"))
.OrderBy("BirthDate")
.Select("Name", "Age", "BirthDate");
var customers = query.ToList((r) => new
{
Name = r.Get<string>("Name"),
Age = r.Get<int>("Age"),
BirthDate = r.Get<DateTime?>("BirtDate")
});
The part I'd like to improve is the FS.Col("ColumnName"), it's supposed to stand for FluentSql.Column (return a new FluentColumn(columnName)), but I find it a bit long in that context, what I'd really like is to be able to use just Col("ColumnName")...
Do anybody see a trick I could use to achieve that, or another syntax idea?
My ideas:
Extension method on string: Where("Name".Col() == "Jon")
Lambda expression with factory object using indexer: .Where(c => c["Name"] == "Jon")
Anyone see something better/shorter/nicer?
Edit:
my second idea looks good but there's a downside if i use it in another context:
I sometime need to use FluentColumns in Select (or OrderBy, or GroupBy) statements like that:
query.Select(FS.Col("Name").As("Customer"), FS.Col("OrderId").Count().As("OrdersCount"));
I would have to repeat the 'c => ' for each column...

A twist on your second option (which is pretty good) would be to use a dynamic expandoobject in the lambda instead of a string indexer.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/csharpfaq/archive/2009/10/01/dynamic-in-c-4-0-introducing-the-expandoobject.aspx

Just for information, I decided to go with an indexer syntax on the FluentDb instance:
db["Customer", "AddressId"] mean column AddressId of table Customer,
an alternative syntax is available: db["Customer"]["AddressId"]
So in the end, it's gonna be (I still need to find a trick to make the Column declaration without table nice):
.Where(db["Customer", "Name"] == "Jon")