We Keep Coding

Simplest method to prove that the contents of two lists (containing objects) are equal

I am having a bit of a frustrating time finding a simple method to compare and prove that the contents of two lists are equal. I have looked at a number of solutions on stackoverflow but I have not been successful. Some of the solutions look like they will require a large amount of work to implement and do something that on the face of it to my mind should be simpler, but perhaps I am too simple to realize that this cannot be done simply :)
I have created a fiddle with some detail that can be viewed here: https://dotnetfiddle.net/cvQr5d
Alternatively please find the full example below, I am having trouble with the object comparison method (variable finalResult) as it's returning false and if the content were being compared I would expect the value to be true:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
public class ResponseExample
{
public Guid Id { get; set; } = Guid.Parse("00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000");
public int Value { get; set; } = 0;
public string Initials { get; set; } = "J";
public string FirstName { get; set; } = "Joe";
public string Surname { get; set; } = "Blogs";
public string CellPhone { get; set; } = "0923232199";
public bool EmailVerified { get; set; } = false;
public bool CellPhoneVerified { get; set; } = true;
}
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
var responseOne = new ResponseExample();
var responseTwo = new ResponseExample();
var responseThree = new ResponseExample();
var responseFour = new ResponseExample();
List<ResponseExample> objectListOne = new List<ResponseExample>();
objectListOne.Add(responseOne);
objectListOne.Add(responseTwo);
List<ResponseExample> objectListTwo = new List<ResponseExample>();
objectListTwo.Add(responseThree);
objectListTwo.Add(responseFour);
bool result = objectListOne.Count == objectListTwo.Count();
Console.WriteLine($"Count: {result}");
bool finalResult = ScrambledEquals<ResponseExample>(objectListOne, objectListTwo);
Console.WriteLine($"Object compare: {finalResult}");
}
//https://stackoverflow.com/a/3670089/3324415
public static bool ScrambledEquals<T>(IEnumerable<T> list1, IEnumerable<T> list2)
{
var cnt = new Dictionary<T,
int>();
foreach (T s in list1)
{
if (cnt.ContainsKey(s))
{
cnt[s]++;
}
else
{
cnt.Add(s, 1);
}
}
foreach (T s in list2)
{
if (cnt.ContainsKey(s))
{
cnt[s]--;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
return cnt.Values.All(c => c == 0);
}
}

As people in comments have pointed out this will not work as comparing a complex type by default compares whether the reference is the same. Field by field comparison will not work without implementing equality methods (and then you would need to overload GetHashCode and so on). See https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.object.equals?view=net-5.0
However, if you can use c# 9, which is what you have in the fiddle you can define the type as a record instead of class. Records have built in field by field comparison. See https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/whats-new/tutorials/records#characteristics-of-records
So public class ResponseExample would become public record ResponseExample and your code works as you expect.

Use Enumerable.All<TSource>(IEnumerable<TSource>, Func<TSource,Boolean>) Method which Determines whether all elements of a sequence satisfy a condition.
Once you have initilized your two List
list1.All(x=>list2.Contains(x))
This works by ensuring that all elements in list2 are containted in list1 otherwise returns false

Your method as is will compare if the 2 lists contain the same objects. So it is returning false as there are 4 different objects. If you create your list like this, using the same objects, it will return true:
List<ResponseExample> objectListOne = new List<ResponseExample>();
objectListOne.Add(responseOne);
objectListOne.Add(responseTwo);
List<ResponseExample> objectListTwo = new List<ResponseExample>();
objectListTwo.Add(responseTwo);
objectListTwo.Add(responseOne);
To get a true value when the contents of the objects are the same you could serialize the objects into a json string like this:
public static bool ScrambledEquals<T>(IEnumerable<T> list1, IEnumerable<T> list2)
{
JavaScriptSerializer json = new JavaScriptSerializer();
var cnt = new Dictionary<string,
int>();
foreach (T _s in list1)
{
string s = json.Serialize(_s);
if (cnt.ContainsKey(s))
{
cnt[s]++;
}
else
{
cnt.Add(s, 1);
}
}
foreach (T _s in list2)
{
string s = json.Serialize(_s);
if (cnt.ContainsKey(s))
{
cnt[s]--;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
return cnt.Values.All(c => c == 0);
}

If the performance is not a big deal, you can use Newtonsoft.Json. We will be able to compare different types of objects as well as run a deep equals check.
First install the package:
Install-Package Newtonsoft.Json
Here is the code snip:
public static bool DeepEqualsUsingJson<T>(IList<T> l1, IList<T> l2)
{
if (ReferenceEquals(l1, l2))
return true;
if (ReferenceEquals(l2, null))
return false;
if (l1.Count != l2.Count)
return false;
var l1JObject = l1.Select(i => JObject.FromObject(i)).ToList();
var l2JObject = l2.Select(i => JObject.FromObject(i)).ToList();
foreach (var o1 in l1JObject)
{
var index = l2JObject.FindIndex(o2 => JToken.DeepEquals(o1, o2));
if (index == -1)
return false;
l2JObject.RemoveAt(index);
}
return l2JObject.Count == 0;
}

Check which elements are on one list comparing to another list LINQ

I have two lists, one of all languages and another subset of languages that the site has, the idea is to return all the languages but change the property of a boolean if the element of the subset corresponds to the list of all languages.
DTO of language:
public class DTOLanguage
{
public bool HaveLanguage { get; set; }
public int IdLanguage { get; set; }
//Other properties...
}
Method that returns all languages:
public List<DTOLanguage> GetLanguages()
{
var result = repository.RepSite.GetLanguages().Select(x => new DTOLanguage
{
IdLanguage = x.IdLanguage,
CodName = x.CodName,
Name = x.Name
}).ToList();
return result;
}
Method that returns the subset of languages:
public List<DTOLanguage> GetLanguagesById(int idSite)
{
var result = repository.RepSite.GetLanguagesById(idSite).Select(x => new DTOLanguage
{
IdLanguage = x.IdLanguage
}).ToList();
return result;
}
The GetLanguagesById is called in the DataAccess layer, so what Im thinking is that this method should receive another parameter (what GetLanguages returns) and make some fancy LINQ there.
I know that I can filter (example):
SubsetOfLanguages.Where(lg => lg.IdLanguage == AllLanguagesItem.IdLanguage)
{
AllLanguagesItem.HaveLanguage = True;
}
But Im not really sure as how it should be.
Thanks in advance.

You could use Contains extension method this way:
var languages=GetLanguages();
var subsetids=repository.RepSite.GetLanguagesById(idSite).Select(x =>x.IdLanguage);//Select just the id value
foreach(var l in languages.Where(l=>subsetids.Contains(l.IdLanguage)))
{
l.HaveLanguage = true;
}

You could do this:
var allLanguages = GetLanguages();
var subset = SubsetOfLanguages
.Where(lg => allLanguages.Any(a => lg.IdLanguage == a.IdLanguage))
.ToArray();
foreach(var item in subset)
{
item.HaveLanguage = True;
}

C# how to avoid multiple foreach and if statements [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I have the below function that works and cycles through 3 possible levels.
Is there a way to do the same as the function below but not have to do the multiple foreach statements?
Basically the reponses list can contain multiple GroupResponseTypes
each of these can contain multiple ElementResponseBaseTypes
which can be a variety of types themselves
I'm interested in finding a value in an ElementResponseType
And each ElementResponseBaseType itself can be a GroupResponseType, it to containing multiple types.
So i'm looking at an easy way to scan through the whole structure for a specific Element.Reference
and return the relevant value
Any help is much appreciated
public static string GetValueFromFormField(List<ResponseBaseType> responses, string fieldref)
{
string fieldvalue = String.Empty;
foreach (GroupResponseType groups in responses)
{
foreach (ElementResponseBaseType firstelements in groups.Responses)
{
if (firstelements.GetType() == typeof(ElementResponseType))
{
if (firstelements.Element.Reference == fieldref)
{
ElementResponseType firstelement = new ElementResponseType();
firstelement = (ElementResponseType)firstelements;
fieldvalue = firstelement.Value;
}
}
else if (firstelements.GetType() == typeof(GroupResponseType))
{
GroupResponseType secondgroup = new GroupResponseType();
secondgroup = (GroupResponseType)firstelements;
foreach (ElementResponseBaseType secondelements in secondgroup.Responses)
{
if (secondelements.GetType() == typeof(ElementResponseType))
{
if (secondelements.Element.Reference == fieldref)
{
ElementResponseType secondelement = new ElementResponseType();
secondelement = (ElementResponseType)secondelements;
fieldvalue = secondelement.Value;
}
}
else if (secondelements.GetType() == typeof(GroupResponseType))
{
GroupResponseType thirdgroup = new GroupResponseType();
thirdgroup = (GroupResponseType)secondelements;
foreach (ElementResponseBaseType thirdelements in thirdgroup.Responses)
{
if (thirdelements.GetType() == typeof(ElementResponseType))
{
if (thirdelements.Element.Reference == fieldref)
{
ElementResponseType thirdelement = new ElementResponseType();
thirdelement = (ElementResponseType)thirdelements;
fieldvalue = thirdelement.Value;
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
return fieldvalue;
}

You need to identify which parts of your code are used repeatedly and factor them out into new methods. If you do that over and over, eventually you will obtain something like this:
public static string GetValueFromResponses(IEnumerable<ElementResponseBaseType> responses, string fieldref)
{
foreach (ElementResponseBaseType response in responses)
{
ElementResponseType element = response as ElementResponseType;
if (element != null)
{
string foundValue = CheckElement(element, fieldref);
if (foundValue != null)
{
return foundValue;
}
}
else
{
GroupResponseType group = response as GroupResponseType;
if (group != null)
{
string foundValue = GetValueFromResponses(group.Responses, fieldref);
if (foundValue != null)
{
return foundValue;
}
}
}
}
return string.Empty;
}
private static string CheckElement(ElementResponseType element, string fieldref)
{
if (element.Element.Reference == fieldref)
{
return element.Value;
}
return null;
}
Here's a version that uses Linq (this contains all of the functionality in your original method):
public static string GetValueFromResponses(IEnumerable<ElementResponseBaseType> responses, string fieldref)
{
var foundInElements = responses.OfType<ElementResponseType>()
.Select(e => CheckElement(e, fieldref));
var foundInGroups = responses.OfType<GroupResponseType>()
.Select(g => GetValueFromResponses(g.Responses,
fieldref));
return foundInElements.Concat(foundInGroups)
.FirstOrDefault(s => s != null) ?? string.Empty;
}
private static string CheckElement(ElementResponseType element, string fieldref)
{
if (element.Element.Reference == fieldref)
{
return element.Value;
}
return null;
}

You should give your base type, in this case ResponseBaseType, a member that returns all of it's decedent leaf nodes. You can then implement the behavior of that member separately for each type. The group type can return all of the leaves in all of its own children (recursively), and the single item can return itself.
You can then take any instance of the base type and get all of the leaves, or, in this case, the first leaf. Note that since you're only trying to get the first result here, not all of them, you'd benefit from making your implementation of the group's member use deferred execution, so that you don't need to bother computing all of the values just to get the first.
As complex as that might seem at first, it takes very little code to actually implement.
public abstract class ResponseBaseType
{
public abstract IEnumerable<ElementResponseType> Leaves { get; }
}
public class GroupResponseType : ResponseBaseType
{
public IEnumerable<ResponseBaseType> Children { get; private set; }
public override IEnumerable<ElementResponseType> Leaves
{
get
{
return Children.SelectMany(child => child.Leaves);
}
}
}
public class ElementResponseType : ResponseBaseType
{
public override IEnumerable<ElementResponseType> Leaves
{
get
{
yield return this;
}
}
}
This enables you to take your list of responses, map it to a sequences of all of their leaves, and then get the first/last leaf from that.
responses.SelectMany(response => response.Leaves).Last();

Where's the best place for validation... constructor or leave to client to call?

This is really a generic (and probably a more subjective too) question. I have some classes where I use an interface to define a standard approach to validating the object state. When I did this, I got to scratching my head... is it best to
1.) allow the constructor (or initializing method) to silently filter out the errant information automatically or...
2.) allow the client to instantiate the object however and let the client also call the interface's IsValid property or Validate() method before moving forward?
Basically one approach is silent but could be misleading in that the client may not be aware that certain pieces of information were filtered away due to it not meeting the validation criteria. The other approach then would be more straight forward, but also adds a step or two? What's typical here?
Okay, after a long day of trying to keep up with some other things, I finally did come up with an example. Please for me for it as it's not ideal and by no means something wonderful, but hopefully should serve well enough to get the point across. My current project is just too complicated to put something simple out for this, so I made something up... and trust me... totally made up.
Alright, the objects in the example are this:
Client: representing client-side code (Console App btw)
IValidationInfo: This is the actual interface I'm using in my current project. It allows me to create a validation framework for the "back-end" objects not necessarily intended for the Client to use since the business logic could be complicated enough. This also allowed me to separate validation code and call as-needed for the business logic.
OrderManager: This is an object the client-side code can use to manage their orders. It's client-friendly so-to-speak.
OrderSpecification: This is an object the client-side code can use to request an order. But if the business logic doesn't work out, an exception can be raised (or if necessary the order not added and exceptions ignored...) In my real-world example I actually have an object that's not quite so black-and-white as to which side of this fence it goes... thus my original question when I realized I could push validation request (calling IsValid or Validate()) to the cilent.
CustomerDescription: represents customers to which I've classified (pretending to have been read from a DB.
Product: Represents a particular product which is classified also.
OrderDescription: Represents the official order request.The business rule is that the Customer cannot order anything to which they've not been classified (I know.. that's not very real-world, but it gave me something to work with...)
Ok... I just realized I can't attach a file here, so here's the code. I apologize for it's lengthy appearance. That was the best I could do to create a client-friendly front-end and business logic back-end using my Validation interface:
public class Client
{
static OrderManager orderMgr = new OrderManager();
static void Main(string[] args)
{
//Request a new order
//Note: Only the OrderManager and OrderSpecification are used by the Client as to keep the
// Client from having to know and understand the framework beyond that point.
OrderSpecification orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer1", new Product(IndustryCategory.FoodServices, "Vending Items"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
Console.WriteLine("The OrderManager has {0} items for {1} customers.", orderMgr.ProductCount, orderMgr.CustomerCount);
//Now add a second item proving that the business logic to add for an existing customer works
Console.WriteLine("Adding another valid item for the same customer.");
orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer1", new Product(IndustryCategory.FoodServices, "Sodas"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
Console.WriteLine("The OrderManager now has {0} items for {1} customers.", orderMgr.ProductCount, orderMgr.CustomerCount);
Console.WriteLine("Adding a new valid order for a new customer.");
orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer2", new Product(IndustryCategory.Residential, "Magazines"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
Console.WriteLine("The OrderManager now has {0} items for {1} customers.", orderMgr.ProductCount, orderMgr.CustomerCount);
Console.WriteLine("Adding a invalid one will not work because the customer is not set up to receive these kinds of items. Should get an exception with message...");
try
{
orderSpec = new OrderSpecification("Customer3", new Product(IndustryCategory.Residential, "Magazines"));
orderMgr.SubmitOrderRequest(orderSpec);
}
catch (Exception ex)
{
Console.WriteLine(ex.Message);
}
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
public interface IValidationInfo
{
string[] ValidationItems { get; }
bool IsValid { get; }
void Validate();
List<string> GetValidationErrors();
string GetValidationError(string itemName);
}
public class OrderManager
{
private List<OrderDescription> _orders = new List<OrderDescription>();
public List<OrderDescription> Orders
{
get { return new List<OrderDescription>(_orders); }
private set { _orders = value; }
}
public int ProductCount
{
get
{
int itemCount = 0;
this.Orders.ForEach(o => itemCount += o.Products.Count);
return itemCount;
}
}
public int CustomerCount
{
get
{
//since there's only one customer per order, just return the number of orders
return this.Orders.Count;
}
}
public void SubmitOrderRequest(OrderSpecification orderSpec)
{
if (orderSpec.IsValid)
{
List<OrderDescription> orders = this.Orders;
//Since the particular customer may already have an order, we might as well add to an existing
OrderDescription existingOrder = orders.FirstOrDefault(o => string.Compare(orderSpec.Order.Customer.Name, o.Customer.Name, true) == 0) as OrderDescription;
if (existingOrder != null)
{
List<Product> existingProducts = orderSpec.Order.Products;
orderSpec.Order.Products.ForEach(p => existingOrder.AddProduct(p));
}
else
{
orders.Add(orderSpec.Order);
}
this.Orders = orders;
}
else
orderSpec.Validate(); //Let the OrderSpecification pass the business logic validation down the chain
}
}
public enum IndustryCategory
{
Residential,
Textile,
FoodServices,
Something
}
public class OrderSpecification : IValidationInfo
{
public OrderDescription Order { get; private set; }
public OrderSpecification(string customerName, Product product)
{
//Should use a method in the class to search and retrieve Customer... pretending here
CustomerDescription customer = null;
switch (customerName)
{
case "Customer1":
customer = new CustomerDescription() { Name = customerName, Category = IndustryCategory.FoodServices };
break;
case "Customer2":
customer = new CustomerDescription() { Name = customerName, Category = IndustryCategory.Residential };
break;
case "Customer3":
customer = new CustomerDescription() { Name = customerName, Category = IndustryCategory.Textile };
break;
}
//Create an OrderDescription to potentially represent the order... valid or not since this is
//a specification being used to request the order
this.Order = new OrderDescription(new List<Product>() { product }, customer);
}
#region IValidationInfo Members
private readonly string[] _validationItems =
{
"OrderDescription"
};
public string[] ValidationItems
{
get { return _validationItems; }
}
public bool IsValid
{
get
{
List<string> validationErrors = GetValidationErrors();
if (validationErrors != null && validationErrors.Count > 0)
return false;
else
return true;
}
}
public void Validate()
{
List<string> errorMessages = GetValidationErrors();
if (errorMessages != null && errorMessages.Count > 0)
{
StringBuilder errorMessageReported = new StringBuilder();
errorMessages.ForEach(em => errorMessageReported.AppendLine(em));
throw new Exception(errorMessageReported.ToString());
}
}
public List<string> GetValidationErrors()
{
List<string> errorMessages = new List<string>();
foreach (string item in this.ValidationItems)
{
string errorMessage = GetValidationError(item);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(errorMessage))
errorMessages.Add(errorMessage);
}
return errorMessages;
}
public string GetValidationError(string itemName)
{
switch (itemName)
{
case "OrderDescription":
return ValidateOrderDescription();
default:
return "Invalid item name.";
}
}
#endregion
private string ValidateOrderDescription()
{
string errorMessage = string.Empty;
if (this.Order == null)
errorMessage = "Order was not instantiated.";
else
{
if (!this.Order.IsValid)
{
List<string> orderErrors = this.Order.GetValidationErrors();
orderErrors.ForEach(ce => errorMessage += "\n" + ce);
}
}
return errorMessage;
}
}
public class CustomerDescription : IValidationInfo
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Street { get; set; }
public string City { get; set; }
public string State { get; set; }
public int ZipCode { get; set; }
public IndustryCategory Category { get; set; }
#region IValidationInfo Members
private readonly string[] _validationItems =
{
"Name",
"Street",
"City",
"State",
"ZipCode",
"Category"
};
public string[] ValidationItems
{
get { return _validationItems; }
}
public bool IsValid
{
get
{
List<string> validationErrors = GetValidationErrors();
if (validationErrors != null && validationErrors.Count > 0)
return false;
else
return true;
}
}
public void Validate()
{
List<string> errorMessages = GetValidationErrors();
if (errorMessages != null && errorMessages.Count > 0)
{
StringBuilder errorMessageReported = new StringBuilder();
errorMessages.ForEach(em => errorMessageReported.AppendLine(em));
throw new Exception(errorMessageReported.ToString());
}
}
public List<string> GetValidationErrors()
{
List<string> errorMessages = new List<string>();
foreach (string item in this.ValidationItems)
{
string errorMessage = GetValidationError(item);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(errorMessage))
errorMessages.Add(errorMessage);
}
return errorMessages;
}
public string GetValidationError(string itemName)
{
//Validation methods should be called here... pretending nothings wrong for sake of discussion & simplicity
switch (itemName)
{
case "Name":
return string.Empty;
case "Street":
return string.Empty;
case "City":
return string.Empty;
case "State":
return string.Empty;
case "ZipCode":
return string.Empty;
case "Category":
return string.Empty;
default:
return "Invalid item name.";
}
}
#endregion
}
public class Product
{
public IndustryCategory Category { get; private set; }
public string Description { get; private set; }
public Product(IndustryCategory category, string description)
{
this.Category = category;
this.Description = description;
}
}
public class OrderDescription : IValidationInfo
{
public CustomerDescription Customer { get; private set; }
private List<Product> _products = new List<Product>();
public List<Product> Products
{
get { return new List<Product>(_products); }
private set { _products = value; }
}
public OrderDescription(List<Product> products, CustomerDescription customer)
{
this.Products = products;
this.Customer = customer;
}
public void PlaceOrder()
{
//If order valid, place
if (this.IsValid)
{
//Do stuff to place order
}
else
Validate(); //cause the exceptions to be raised with the validate because business rules were broken
}
public void AddProduct(Product product)
{
List<Product> productsToEvaluate = this.Products;
//some special read, validation, quantity check, pre-existing, etc here
// doing other stuff...
productsToEvaluate.Add(product);
this.Products = productsToEvaluate;
}
#region IValidationInfo Members
private readonly string[] _validationItems =
{
"Customer",
"Products"
};
public string[] ValidationItems
{
get { return _validationItems; }
}
public bool IsValid
{
get
{
List<string> validationErrors = GetValidationErrors();
if (validationErrors != null && validationErrors.Count > 0)
return false;
else
return true;
}
}
public void Validate()
{
List<string> errorMessages = GetValidationErrors();
if (errorMessages != null && errorMessages.Count > 0)
{
StringBuilder errorMessageReported = new StringBuilder();
errorMessages.ForEach(em => errorMessageReported.AppendLine(em));
throw new Exception(errorMessageReported.ToString());
}
}
public List<string> GetValidationErrors()
{
List<string> errorMessages = new List<string>();
foreach (string item in this.ValidationItems)
{
string errorMessage = GetValidationError(item);
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(errorMessage))
errorMessages.Add(errorMessage);
}
return errorMessages;
}
public string GetValidationError(string itemName)
{
switch (itemName)
{
case "Customer":
return ValidateCustomer();
case "Products":
return ValidateProducts();
default:
return "Invalid item name.";
}
}
#endregion
#region Validation Methods
private string ValidateCustomer()
{
string errorMessage = string.Empty;
if (this.Customer == null)
errorMessage = "CustomerDescription is missing a valid value.";
else
{
if (!this.Customer.IsValid)
{
List<string> customerErrors = this.Customer.GetValidationErrors();
customerErrors.ForEach(ce => errorMessage += "\n" + ce);
}
}
return errorMessage;
}
private string ValidateProducts()
{
string errorMessage = string.Empty;
if (this.Products == null || this.Products.Count <= 0)
errorMessage = "Invalid Order. Missing Products.";
else
{
foreach (Product product in this.Products)
{
if (product.Category != Customer.Category)
{
errorMessage += string.Format("\nThe Product, {0}, category does not match the required Customer category for {1}", product.Description, Customer.Name);
}
}
}
return errorMessage;
}
#endregion
}

Any reason you wouldn't want the constructor to noisily throw an exception if the information is valid? It's best to avoid ever creating an object in an invalid state, in my experience.

It's completely depends on the client. There's a trade-off as you already mentioned. By default approach number 1 is my favorite. Creating smart classes with good encapsulation and hiding details from client. The level of smartness depends who is going to use the object. If client is business aware you can reveal details according to the level of this awareness. This is a dichotomy and should not be treated as black or white.

Well if I correctly understood, there are basically two question - whether you should fail right away or later and whether you should omit/assume certain information.
1) I always prefer failing as soon as possible - good example is failing at compile time vs failing at run time - you always want to fail at compile time. So if something is wrong with the state of some object, as Jon said - throw exception right away as loudly as you can and deal with it - do not introduce additional complexity down the road as you'll be heading for if/elseif/elseif/elseif/else mumbo jumbo.
2) When it comes to user input, if you are in position to simply filter out errors automatically - just do it. For example, I almost never ask users for country - if I really need it, I automatically detect it from IP and display it in the form. It's way easier if user just needs to confirm/change the data - and I don't need to deal with null situation.
Now, in case we are talking about the data generated by code during some processing - for me situation is drastically different - I always want to know an much as possible (for easier debugging down the road) and ideally you never should destroy any piece of information.
To wrap up, in your case I would recommend that you keep IsValid as simple yes/no (not yes/no/maybe/kindaok/etc). If you can fix some problems automatically - do it, but consider that they keep object in IsValid yes. For everything else, you throw exception and go to IsValid=no.

Replace a collection item using Linq

How do I find and replace a property using Linq in this specific scenario below:
public interface IPropertyBag { }
public class PropertyBag : IPropertyBag
{
public Property[] Properties { get; set; }
public Property this[string name]
{
get { return Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single(); }
//TODO: Just copying values... Find out how to find the index and replace the value
set { Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single().Value = value.Value; }
}
}
Thanks for helping out in advance.

Do not use LINQ because it will not improve the code because LINQ is designed to query collection and not to modify them. I suggest the following.
// Just realized that Array.IndexOf() is a static method unlike
// List.IndexOf() that is an instance method.
Int32 index = Array.IndexOf(this.Properties, name);
if (index != -1)
{
this.Properties[index] = value;
}
else
{
throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException();
}
Why are Array.Sort() and Array.IndexOf() methods static?
Further I suggest not to use an array. Consider using IDictionary<String, Property>. This simplifies the code to the following.
this.Properties[name] = value;
Note that neither solution is thread safe.
An ad hoc LINQ solution - you see, you should not use it because the whole array will be replaced with a new one.
this.Properties = Enumerable.Union(
this.Properties.Where(p => p.Name != name),
Enumerable.Repeat(value, 1)).
ToArray();

[note: this answer was due to a misunderstanding of the question - see the comments on this answer. Apparently, I'm a little dense :(]
Is your 'Property' a class or a struct?
This test passes for me:
public class Property
{
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Value { get; set; }
}
public interface IPropertyBag { }
public class PropertyBag : IPropertyBag
{
public Property[] Properties { get; set; }
public Property this[string name]
{
get { return Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single(); }
set { Properties.Where((e) => e.Name == name).Single().Value = value.Value; }
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod1()
{
var pb = new PropertyBag() { Properties = new Property[] { new Property { Name = "X", Value = "Y" } } };
Assert.AreEqual("Y", pb["X"].Value);
pb["X"] = new Property { Name = "X", Value = "Z" };
Assert.AreEqual("Z", pb["X"].Value);
}
I have to wonder why the getter returns a 'Property' instead of whatever datatype .Value, but I'm still curious why you're seeing a different result than what I am.