We Keep Coding

Restricting post/pre increment operator over a value rather than a variable, property and indexer

From this post (and not only) we got to the point that the ++ operator cannot be applied on expressions returning value.
And it's really obvious that 5++ is better to write as 5 + 1. I just want to summarize the whole thing around the increment/decrement operator. So let's go through these snippets of code that could be helpful to somebody stuck with the ++ first time at least.
// Literal
int x = 0++; // Error
// Constant
const int Y = 1;
double f = Y++; // error. makes sense, constants are not variables actually.
int z = AddFoo()++; // Error
Summary: ++ works for variables, properties (through a synthetic sugar) and indexers(the same).
Now the interest part - any literal expressions are optimized in CSC and, hence when we write, say
int g = 5 + 1; // This is compiled to 6 in IL as one could expect.
IL_0001: ldc.i4.6 // Pushes the integer value of 6 onto the evaluation stack as an int32.
For 5++ doesn't mean 5 becomes 6, it could be a shorthand for 5 + 1, like for x++ = x + 1
What's the real reason behind this restriction?
int p = Foo()++ //? yes you increase the return value of Foo() with 1, what's wrong with that?
Examples of code that can lead to logical issues are appreciated.
One of real-life example could be, perform one more actions than in the array.
for (int i = 0; i < GetCount()++; i++) { }
Maybe the lack of usage opts compiler teams to avoid similar features?
I don't insist this is a feature we lack of, just want to understand the dark side of this for compiler writers perhaps, though I'm not. But I know c++ allows this when returning a reference in the method. I'm neither a c++ guy(very poor knowledge) just want to get the real gist of the restriction.
Like, is it just because c# guys opted to restrict the ++ over value expressions or there are definite cases leading to unpredictable results?

In order for a feature to be worth supporting, it really needs to be useful. The code you've presented is in every case less readable than the alternative, which is just to use the normal binary addition operator. For example:
for (int i = 0; i < GetCount() + 1; i++) { }
I'm all in favour of the language team preventing you from writing unreadable code when in every case where you could do it, there's a simpler alternative.

Well before using these operators you should try to read up on how they do what they do. In particular you should understand the difference between postfix and prefix, which could help figure out what is and isn't allowed.
The ++ and -- operators modify their operands. Which means that the operand must be modifiable. If you can assign a value to the expression in question then it is modifiable, and is probably a variable(c#).
Taking a look at what these operators actually do. The postfix operators should increment after your line of code executes. As for the prefix operators, well they would need to have access to the value before the method had even been called yet. The way I read the syntax is ++lvalue (or ++variable) converting to memory operations:[read, write, read] or for lvalue++ [read, read, write] Though many compilers probably optimize secondary reads.
So looking at foo()++; the value is going to be plopped dead in the center of executing code. Which would mean the compiler would need to save the value somewhere more long-term in order for operations to be performed on said value, after the line of code has finished executing. Which is no doubt the exact reason C++ does not support this syntax either.
If you were to be returning a reference the compiler wouldn't have any trouble with the postfix. Of course in C# value types (ie. int, char, float, etc) cannot be passed by reference as they are value types.

Is there a way to use less than on Strings?

Using a string.CompareTo(string) i can get around this slightly but is not easy to read and i have read on that locallity settings might influence the result.
Is there a way to just simply use < or > on 2 Strings in a more straightforward way?

You can overload operators but you seldom should. To me "stringA" > "stringB" wouldn't mean a damn thing, it's not helping readability IMO. That's why operator overloading guidelines advise not to overload operators if the meaning is not obvious.
EDIT: Operator Overloading Usage Guidelines
Also, in case of String I'm afraid you can't do it seeing as you can put operator-overloading methods only in the class in which the methods are defined.
If the syntax of CompareTo bothers you, maybe wrapping it in extension method will solve your problem?
Like that:
public static bool IsLessThan(this string str, string str2) {
return str.Compare(str2) < 0;
}
I still find it confusing for reader though.
The bottom line is, you can't overload operators for String. Usually you can do something like declaring a partial and stuffing your overloads there, but String is a sealed class, so not this time. I think that the extension method with reasonable name is your best bet. You can put CompareTo or some custom logic inside it.

CompareTo is the proper way in my opinion, you can use the overloads to specify culture specific parameters...

You mention in a comment that you're comparing two strings with values of the form "A100" and "B001". This works in your legacy VB 6 code with the < and > operators because of the way that VB 6 implements string comparison.
The algorithm is quite simple. It walks through the string, one character at a time, and compares the ASCII values of each character. As soon as a character from one string is found to have a lower ASCII code than the corresponding character in the other string, the comparison stops and the first string is declared to be "less than" the second. (VB 6 can be forced to perform a case-insensitive comparison based on the system's current locale by placing the Option Compare Text statement at the top of
the relevant code module, but this is not the default setting.)
Simple, of course, but not entirely logical. Comparing ASCII values skips over all sorts of interesting things you might find in strings nowadays; namely non-ASCII characters. Since you appear to be dealing with strings whose contents have pre-defined limits, this may not be a problem in your particular case. But more generally, writing code like strA < strB is going to look like complete nonsense to anyone else who has to maintain your code (it seems like you're already having this experience), and I encourage you to do the "right thing" even when you're dealing with a fixed set of possible inputs.
There is nothing "straightforward" about using < or > on string values. If you need to implement this functionality, you're going to have to do it yourself. Following the algorithm that I described VB 6 as using above, you could write your own comparison function and call that in your code, instead. Walk through each character in the string, determine if it is a character or a number, and convert it to the appropriate data type. From there, you can compare the two parsed values, and either move on to the next index in the string or return an "equality" value.

There is another problem with that, I think:
Assert.IsFalse(10 < 2);
Assert.IsTrue("10" < "2");
(The second Assert assumes you did an overload for the < operator on the string class.)
But the operator suggests otherwise!!
I agree with Dyppl: you shouldn't do it!

evaluate an arithmetic expression stored in a string (C#)

I'm working on a application in C# in which I want to calculate an arithmetic expression that is given as a string.
So like I got a string:
string myExpr="4*(80+(5/2))+2";
And I want to calculate the outcome of the arithmetic expression.
While in a language such as Javascript, PHP etc. you could just use Eval to do the trick this doesnt seem to be an option in C#.
I suppose it is possible to write a code to devide it into countless simple expressions, calculate them and add them together but this would take quite some time and I'm likely to have lots of troubles in my attempt to do so.
So... my question, Is there any 'simple' way to do this?

There's a javascript library you can reference, then just do something like:
var engine = VsaEngine.CreateEngine();
Eval.JScriptEvaluate(mySum, engine);
Edit;
Library is Microsoft.JScript

You could just call the JScript.NET eval function. Any .NET language can call into any other.

Have you seen http://ncalc.codeplex.com ?
It's extensible, fast (e.g. has its own cache) enables you to provide custom functions and varaibles at run time by handling EvaluateFunction/EvaluateParameter events. Example expressions it can parse:
Expression e = new Expression("Round(Pow(Pi, 2) + Pow([Pi2], 2) + X, 2)");
e.Parameters["Pi2"] = new Expression("Pi * Pi");
e.Parameters["X"] = 10;
e.EvaluateParameter += delegate(string name, ParameterArgs args)
{
if (name == "Pi")
args.Result = 3.14;
};
Debug.Assert(117.07 == e.Evaluate());
It also handles unicode & many data type natively. It comes with an antler file if you want to change the grammer. There is also a fork which supports MEF to load new functions.
It also supports logical operators, date/time's strings and if statements.

I've used NCalc with great success. It's extremely flexible and allows for variables in your formulas. The formula you listed in your question could be evaluated this easily:
string myExpr = "4*(80+(5/2))+2";
decimal result = Convert.ToDecimal(new Expression(myExpr).Evaluate());

You need to implement an expression evaluator. It's fairly straightforward if you have the background, but it's not "simple". Eval in interpreted environments actually re-runs the language parser over the string; you need to emulate that operation, for the bits you care about, in your C# code.
Search for "expression evaluators" and "recursive descent parser" to get started.

If you have Bjarne Stroustrup's The C++ Programming Language, in Chapter 6 he explains step by step (in C++) how to do exactly what Chris Tavares suggests.
It's straightforward but a little heady if you're not familiar with the procedure.

I needed to do something similar for an undergrad projectand I found this
Reverse Polish Notation In C#
Tutorial and code to be extremely valuable.
It's pretty much just an implementation of converting the string to Reverse Polish Notation then evaluating it. It's extremely easy to use, understand and add new functions.
Source code is included.

Try something like this:
int mySum = 4*(80+(5/2))+2;
var myStringSum = mySum.toString();

C# better way to do this?

Hi I have this code below and am looking for a prettier/faster way to do this.
Thanks!
string value = "HelloGoodByeSeeYouLater";
string[] y = new string[]{"Hello", "You"};
foreach(string x in y)
{
value = value.Replace(x, "");
}

You could do:
y.ToList().ForEach(x => value = value.Replace(x, ""));
Although I think your variant is more readable.

Forgive me, but someone's gotta say it,
value = Regex.Replace( value, string.Join("|", y.Select(Regex.Escape)), "" );
Possibly faster, since it creates fewer strings.
EDIT: Credit to Gabe and lasseespeholt for Escape and Select.

While not any prettier, there are other ways to express the same thing.
In LINQ:
value = y.Aggregate(value, (acc, x) => acc.Replace(x, ""));
With String methods:
value = String.Join("", value.Split(y, StringSplitOptions.None));
I don't think anything is going to be faster in managed code than a simple Replace in a foreach though.

It depends on the size of the string you are searching. The foreach example is perfectly fine for small operations but creates a new instance of the string each time it operates because the string is immutable. It also requires searching the whole string over and over again in a linear fashion.
The basic solutions have all been proposed. The Linq examples provided are good if you are comfortable with that syntax; I also liked the suggestion of an extension method, although that is probably the slowest of the proposed solutions. I would avoid a Regex unless you have an extremely specific need.
So let's explore more elaborate solutions and assume you needed to handle a string that was thousands of characters in length and had many possible words to be replaced. If this doesn't apply to the OP's need, maybe it will help someone else.
Method #1 is geared towards large strings with few possible matches.
Method #2 is geared towards short strings with numerous matches.
Method #1
I have handled large-scale parsing in c# using char arrays and pointer math with intelligent seek operations that are optimized for the length and potential frequency of the term being searched for. It follows the methodology of:
Extremely cheap Peeks one character at a time
Only investigate potential matches
Modify output when match is found
For example, you might read through the whole source array and only add words to the output when they are NOT found. This would remove the need to keep redimensioning strings.
A simple example of this technique is looking for a closing HTML tag in a DOM parser. For example, I may read an opening STYLE tag and want to skip through (or buffer) thousands of characters until I find a closing STYLE tag.
This approach provides incredibly high performance, but it's also incredibly complicated if you don't need it (plus you need to be well-versed in memory manipulation/management or you will create all sorts of bugs and instability).
I should note that the .Net string libraries are already incredibly efficient but you can optimize this approach for your own specific needs and achieve better performance (and I have validated this firsthand).
Method #2
Another alternative involves storing search terms in a Dictionary containing Lists of strings. Basically, you decide how long your search prefix needs to be, and read characters from the source string into a buffer until you meet that length. Then, you search your dictionary for all terms that match that string. If a match is found, you explore further by iterating through that List, if not, you know that you can discard the buffer and continue.
Because the Dictionary matches strings based on hash, the search is non-linear and ideal for handling a large number of possible matches.
I'm using this methodology to allow instantaneous (<1ms) searching of every airfield in the US by name, state, city, FAA code, etc. There are 13K airfields in the US, and I've created a map of about 300K permutations (again, a Dictionary with prefixes of varying lengths, each corresponding to a list of matches).
For example, Phoenix, Arizona's main airfield is called Sky Harbor with the short ID of KPHX. I store:
KP
KPH
KPHX
Ph
Pho
Phoe
Ar
Ari
Ariz
Sk
Sky
Ha
Har
Harb
There is a cost in terms of memory usage, but string interning probably reduces this somewhat and the resulting speed justifies the memory usage on data sets of this size. Searching happens as the user types and is so fast that I have actually introduced an artificial delay to smooth out the experience.
Send me a message if you have the need to dig into these methodologies.

Extension method for elegance
(arguably "prettier" at the call level)
I'll implement an extension method that allows you to call your implementation directly on the original string as seen here.
value = value.Remove(y);
// or
value = value.Remove("Hello", "You");
// effectively
string value = "HelloGoodByeSeeYouLater".Remove("Hello", "You");
The extension method is callable on any string value in fact, and therefore easily reusable.
Implementation of Extension method:
I'm going to wrap your own implementation (shown in your question) in an extension method for pretty or elegant points and also employ the params keyword to provide some flexbility passing the arguments. You can substitute somebody else's faster implementation body into this method.
static class EXTENSIONS {
static public string Remove(this string thisString, params string[] arrItems) {
// Whatever implementation you like:
if (thisString == null)
return null;
var temp = thisString;
foreach(string x in arrItems)
temp = temp.Replace(x, "");
return temp;
}
}
That's the brightest idea I can come up with right now that nobody else has touched on.

Parser for query filter expression tree

I am looking for a parser that can operate on a query filter. However, I'm not quite sure of the terminology so it's proving hard work. I hope that someone can help me. I've read about 'Recursive descent parsers' but I wonder if these are for full-blown language parsers rather than the logical expression evaluation that I'm looking for.
Ideally, I am looking for .NET code (C#) but also a similar parser that works in T-SQL.
What I want is for something to parse e.g.:
((a=b)|(e=1))&(c<=d)
Ideally, the operators can be definable (e.g. '<' vs 'lt', '=' vs '==' vs 'eq', etc) and we can specify function-type labels (e.g. (left(x,1)='e')). The parser loads this, obeys order precedence (and ideally handles the lack of any brackets) and then calls-back to my code with expressions to evaluate to a boolean result - e.g. 'a=b'?). I wouldn't expect the parser to understand the custom functions in the expression (though some basic ones would be useful, like string splitting). Splitting the expression (into left- and right-hand parts) would be nice.
It is preferable that the parser asks the minimum number of questions to have to work out the final result - e.g. if one side of an AND is false, there is no point evaluating the other side, and to evaluate the easiest side first (i.e. in the above expression, 'c<=d' should be assumed to be quicker and thus evaluated first.
I can imagine that this is a lot of work to do, however, fairly common. Can anyone give me any pointers? If there aren't parsers that are as flexible as above, are there any basic parsers that I can use as a start?
Many Thanks
Lee

Take a look at this. ANTLR is a good parser generator and the linked-to article has working code which you may be able to adapt to your needs.

You could check out Irony. With it you define your grammar in C# code using a syntax which is not to far from bnf. They even have a simple example on their site (expression evaluator) which seems to be quite close to what you want to achieve.
Edit: There's been a talk about Irony at this year's Lang.Net symposium.
Hope this helps!

Try Vici.Parser: download it here (free) , it's the most flexible expression parser/evaluator I've found so far.

If it's possible for you, use .Net 3.5 expressions.
Compiler parses your expression for you and gives you expression tree that you can analyze and use as you need. Not very simple but doable (actually all implementations of IQueryable interface do exactly this).

You can use .NET expression trees for this. And the example is actually pretty simple.
Expression<Func<int, int, int, int, bool>> test = (int a, int b, int c, int d) => ((a == b) | (c == 1)) & (c <= d);
And then just look at "test" in the debugger. Everything is already parsed for you, you can just use it.
The only problem is that in .NET 3.5 you can have only up to 4 arguments in Func. So, I changed "e" to "c" in one place. In 4.0 this limit is changed to 16.