We Keep Coding

C# Expression with collection item properties - access member names

I am building an SDK for building HTTP Queries to a certain system where I need to specify in the query string which properties of a model I want to include.
For example https://system/api/projects/1?fields=name,description
I want the SDK to be strongly typed, so I have query builder classes which allow specifying the query as
new ProjectBuilder(1, f => f.Name, f => f.Description)
That works very nice even for complex tree of nested objects, e.g. f => f.ProjectTemplate.Location.Owner.Email
The only problem is with collections, e.g.
public class Task
{
public string Name {get;set;}
//lots of other stuff
}
public string Project
{
public string Description {get;set;}
//lots of other stuff
public List<Task> Tasks {get;set;}
}
When I need to retrieve Project's Description and names of all Tasks in the Project, the query string would have to be as follows:
https://system/api/projects/1?fields=description,tasks.name
I cannot define an expression like that:
new ProjectBuilder(1, f => f.Tasks.Name), the syntax seem to require f.Tasks[0].Name.
Can I have the same nice expression-type syntax with collection members (and further nested objects)?
The code that I use for member access from expression is below (slighty simplified):
public static string Evaluate<T>(Expression<Func<T, object>> expression)
{
if (expression.Body is MemberExpression body)
{
return EvaluateExpressionTree(body);
}
else
{
throw new InvalidOperationException(
"Invalid expression. Expected Member expression, e.g. p=>p.Description");
}
}
private static string EvaluateExpressionTree(MemberExpression root)
{
if (root.Expression is MemberExpression nested)
{
var nestedProperty = EvaluateExpressionTree(nested);
var thisProperty = root.Member.Name;
return nestedProperty + "." + thisProperty;
}
else if (root.Expression is MethodCallExpression call)
{
//that's where I get when using the Tasks[0] syntax
}
else
{
return GetMemberName(root);
}
}
I was able to get to the point of finding the generic type from the collection when the expression was accessing a collection element, but from that point I cannot rebuild the further elements of the expression...

So I managed to solve this for my kind of problem. Not saying this is the way of handling expressions with collection properties, but question is specific, and so is the answer:)
Overview
The solution was to
stringify the expression
tokenize it
remove noise
evaluate parts by getting PropertyInfo by Reflection
keep track of the current type within the expression tree to get correct results
That allows me to have a nice fluent API for strong typed generation of query strings, as visible below.
Code
Usage
[TestMethod]
public void ProjectExpression_NestedType_CollectionAccess()
{
//arrange
ProjectBuilder builder = new ProjectBuilder("000",
f => f.Name,
f => f.Workflow.TaskConfigurations,
f => f.Workflow.TaskConfigurations[0].TaskTemplate.TaskType)
;
//act
string stringified = builder.BuildFullRequestUri();
//assert
Assert.AreEqual("projects/000?fields=name,workflow.taskConfigurations,workflow.taskConfigurations.taskTemplate.taskType", stringified);
}
Implementation:
The caller code that takes the function params:
protected ProjectBuilder(params Expression<Func<Project, object>>[] propertiesToInclude)
{
List<string> values = new List<string>();
foreach (Expression<Func<Project, object>> expression in propertiesToInclude)
{
values.Add(ExpressionEvaluator.Evaluate(expression));
}
this.AddProperties(values);
}
And the expression evaluator that takes each param and transforms it nicely.
internal static class ExpressionEvaluator
{
public static string Evaluate<T>(Expression<Func<T, object>> expression)
{
if (expression.Body is MemberExpression)
{
List<string> result = new List<string>();
List<string> parts = GetExpressionParts(expression);
List<Type> expressionTreeTypes = new List<Type>() { typeof(T) };
foreach (string part in parts)
{
PropertyInfo member = expressionTreeTypes.Last().GetProperty(part);
if (member != null)
{
AddValueFromJsonAttributeOrPropertyName<T>(member, result);
UpdateLastUsedType<T>(member, expressionTreeTypes);
}
else
{
throw new InvalidOperationException($"Expression [{expression.Body}] is not valid. Failed to resolve: [{part}]");
}
}
return string.Join(".", result);
}
else
{
throw new InvalidOperationException("Invalid expression. Expected Member expression, e.g. p=>p.Description");
}
}
private static List<string> GetExpressionParts<T>(Expression<Func<T, object>> expression)
{
var stringified = expression.Body.ToString();
//skip the first part of expression - e.g. (f=>f.) - skip 'f.
//also skip collection accessors
return stringified.Split('.').Where(x => !x.Contains("get_Item(")).Skip(1).ToList();
}
private static void UpdateLastUsedType<T>(PropertyInfo member, List<Type> expressionTreeTypes)
{
//make sure that in case of primitive types we don't change the type
if (member.PropertyType.Assembly == typeof(Project).Assembly && member.PropertyType != expressionTreeTypes.Last())
{
expressionTreeTypes.Add(member.PropertyType);
}
else if (member.PropertyType.IsGenericType) // in case of collection properties, extract the nested type
{
expressionTreeTypes.Add(member.PropertyType.GenericTypeArguments.First());
}
}
private static void AddValueFromJsonAttributeOrPropertyName<T>(MemberInfo member, List<string> result)
{
var attr = member.CustomAttributes
.FirstOrDefault(x => x.AttributeType == typeof(JsonPropertyAttribute))?.ConstructorArguments?
.FirstOrDefault();
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(attr?.Value?.ToString()))
{
result.Add(attr?.Value?.ToString());
}
else
{
result.Add(member.Name[0].ToString().ToLower() + member.Name.Substring(1));
}
}
}

How Can I Add a Dynamically Generated Where Expression for a Navigable Object in My Linq-To-SQL Query?

Background
My client would like to have a method of sending over an array of field (string), value (string), and comparison (enum) values in order to retrieve their data.
public class QueryableFilter {
public string Name { get; set; }
public string Value { get; set; }
public QueryableFilterCompareEnum? Compare { get; set; }
}
My company and I have never attempted to do anything like this before, so it is up to my team to come up with a viable solution. This is the result of working on a solution with a week or so of research.
What Works: Part 1
I have created a service that is able to retrieve the data from our table Classroom. Retrieval of the data is done in Entity Framework Core by way of LINQ-to-SQL. The way I have written below works if one of the fields that are supplied in the filter doesn't exist for Classroom but does exist for its related Organization (the client wanted to be able to search among organization addresses as well) and has a navigatable property.
public async Task<IEnumerable<IExportClassroom>> GetClassroomsAsync(
IEnumerable<QueryableFilter> queryableFilters = null) {
var filters = queryableFilters?.ToList();
IQueryable<ClassroomEntity> classroomQuery = ClassroomEntity.All().AsNoTracking();
// The organization table may have filters searched against it
// If any are, the organization table should be inner joined to all filters are used
IQueryable<OrganizationEntity> organizationQuery = OrganizationEntity.All().AsNoTracking();
var joinOrganizationQuery = false;
// Loop through the supplied queryable filters (if any) to construct a dynamic LINQ-to-SQL queryable
if (filters?.Count > 0) {
foreach (var filter in filters) {
try {
classroomQuery = classroomQuery.BuildExpression(filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare);
} catch (ArgumentException ex) {
if (ex.ParamName == "propertyName") {
organizationQuery = organizationQuery.BuildExpression(filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare);
joinOrganizationQuery = true;
} else {
throw new ArgumentException(ex.Message);
}
}
}
}
// Inner join the classroom and organization queriables (if necessary)
var query = joinOrganizationQuery
? classroomQuery.Join(organizationQuery, classroom => classroom.OrgId, org => org.OrgId, (classroom, org) => classroom)
: classroomQuery;
query = query.OrderBy(x => x.ClassroomId);
IEnumerable<IExportClassroom> results = await query.Select(ClassroomMapper).ToListAsync();
return results;
}
What Works: Part 2
The BuildExpression that exists in code is something that I created as such (with room for expansion).
public static IQueryable<T> BuildExpression<T>(this IQueryable<T> source, string columnName, string value, QueryableFilterCompareEnum? compare = QueryableFilterCompareEnum.Equal) {
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T));
// Get the field/column from the Entity that matches the supplied columnName value
// If the field/column does not exists on the Entity, throw an exception; There is nothing more that can be done
MemberExpression dataField;
try {
dataField = Expression.Property(param, propertyName);
} catch (ArgumentException ex) {
if (ex.ParamName == "propertyName") {
throw new ArgumentException($"Queryable selection does not have a \"{propertyName}\" field.", ex.ParamName);
} else {
throw new ArgumentException(ex.Message);
}
}
ConstantExpression constant = !string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(value)
? Expression.Constant(value.Trim(), typeof(string))
: Expression.Constant(value, typeof(string));
BinaryExpression binary = GetBinaryExpression(dataField, constant, compare);
Expression<Func<T, bool>> lambda = (Expression<Func<T, bool>>)Expression.Lambda(binary, param)
return source.Where(lambda);
}
private static Expression GetBinaryExpression(MemberExpression member, ConstantExpression constant, QueryableFilterCompareEnum? comparisonOperation) {
switch (comparisonOperation) {
case QueryableFilterCompareEnum.NotEqual:
return Expression.Equal(member, constant);
case QueryableFilterCompareEnum.GreaterThan:
return Expression.GreaterThan(member, constant);
case QueryableFilterCompareEnum.GreaterThanOrEqual:
return Expression.GreaterThanOrEqual(member, constant);
case QueryableFilterCompareEnum.LessThan:
return Expression.LessThan(member, constant);
case QueryableFilterCompareEnum.LessThanOrEqual:
return Expression.LessThanOrEqual(member, constant);
case QueryableFilterCompareEnum.Equal:
default:
return Expression.Equal(member, constant);
}
}
}
The Problem / Getting Around to My Question
While the inner join on the Classroom and Organization works, I'd rather not have to pull in a second entity set for checking values that are navigatable. If I typed in a City as my filter name, normally I would do this:
classroomQuery = classroomQuery.Where(x => x.Organization.City == "Atlanta");
That doesn't really work here.
I have tried a couple of different methods in order to get me what I'm looking for:
A compiled function that would return Func<T, bool>, but when put through LINQ-to-SQL, the query did not include it.
I changed it to an Expression<Func<T, bool>>, but my return didn't return a bool in the way I attempted to implement it, so that didn't work.
I switched the way that I was implementing the navigation property, but none of my functions would read the value properly.
Basically, is there some way that I can implement the following in a way that LINQ-to-SQL from Entity Framework Core will work? Other options are welcome as well.
classroomQuery = classroomQuery.Where(x => x.Organization.BuildExpression(filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare));
Edit 01:
When using the expression without the dynamic builder like so:
IQueryable<ClassroomEntity>classroomQuery = ClassroomEntity.Where(x => x.ClassroomId.HasValue).Where(x => x.Organization.City == "Atlanta").AsNoTracking();
The debug reads:
.Call Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.EntityFrameworkQueryableExtensions.AsNoTracking(.Call System.Linq.Queryable.Where(
.Call System.Linq.Queryable.Where(
.Constant<Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Query.Internal.EntityQueryable`1[ClassroomEntity]>(Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore.Query.Internal.EntityQueryable`1[ClassroomEntity]),
'(.Lambda #Lambda1<System.Func`2[ClassroomEntity,System.Boolean]>)),
'(.Lambda #Lambda2<System.Func`2[ClassroomEntity,System.Boolean]>)))
.Lambda #Lambda1<System.Func`2[ClassroomEntity,System.Boolean]>(ClassroomEntity $x)
{
($x.ClassroomId).HasValue
}
.Lambda #Lambda2<System.Func`2[ClassroomEntity,System.Boolean]>(ClassroomEntity $x)
{
($x.Organization).City == "Bronx"
}
I tried with the dynamic builder to get the Classroom teacher, which gave me a debug of:
.Lambda #Lambda3<System.Func`2[ClassroomEntity,System.Boolean]>(ClassroomEntity $var1)
{
$var1.LeadTeacherName == "Sharon Candelariatest"
}
Still cannot figure out how to get ($var1.Organization) as the entity I'm reading from.

If you can ask the client to supply the full dot notation expression for the property. eg "Organization.City";
dataField = (MemberExpression)propertyName.split(".")
.Aggregate(
(Expression)param,
(result,name) => Expression.Property(result, name));

If I am getting your problem statement, you want to be able to travel up the navigation property chain.
If that is indeed the case the real challenge is getting the navigation relationships from EF. And this is where EntityTypeExtensions comes in handy. GetNavigations() in particular.
You could recursively travel up your navigation properties and build property accessor expressions as you go:
private static IEnumerable<Tuple<IProperty, Expression>> GetPropertyAccessors(this IEntityType model, Expression param)
{
var result = new List<Tuple<IProperty, Expression>>();
result.AddRange(model.GetProperties()
.Where(p => !p.IsShadowProperty()) // this is your chance to ensure property is actually declared on the type before you attempt building Expression
.Select(p => new Tuple<IProperty, Expression>(p, Expression.Property(param, p.Name)))); // Tuple is a bit clunky but hopefully conveys the idea
foreach (var nav in model.GetNavigations().Where(p => p is Navigation))
{
var parentAccessor = Expression.Property(param, nav.Name); // define a starting point so following properties would hang off there
result.AddRange(GetPropertyAccessors(nav.ForeignKey.PrincipalEntityType, parentAccessor)); //recursively call ourselves to travel up the navigation hierarchy
}
return result;
}
then your BuildExpression method can probably be a bit simplified. Notice, I added DbContext as parameter:
public static IQueryable<T> BuildExpression<T>(this IQueryable<T> source, DbContext context, string columnName, string value, QueryableFilterCompareEnum? compare = QueryableFilterCompareEnum.Equal)
{
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T));
// Get the field/column from the Entity that matches the supplied columnName value
// If the field/column does not exists on the Entity, throw an exception; There is nothing more that can be done
MemberExpression dataField;
try
{
var model = context.Model.FindEntityType(typeof(T)); // start with our own entity
var props = model.GetPropertyAccessors(param); // get all available field names including navigations
var reference = props.FirstOrDefault(p => RelationalPropertyExtensions.GetColumnName(p.Item1) == columnName); // find the filtered column - you might need to handle cases where column does not exist
dataField = reference.Item2 as MemberExpression; // we happen to already have correct property accessors in our Tuples
}
catch (ArgumentException)
{
throw new NotImplementedException("I think you shouldn't be getting these anymore");
}
ConstantExpression constant = !string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(value)
? Expression.Constant(value.Trim(), typeof(string))
: Expression.Constant(value, typeof(string));
BinaryExpression binary = GetBinaryExpression(dataField, constant, compare);
Expression<Func<T, bool>> lambda = (Expression<Func<T, bool>>)Expression.Lambda(binary, param);
return source.Where(lambda);
}
and GetClassroomsAsync would look something like this:
public async Task<IEnumerable<IExportClassroom>> GetClassroomsAsync(IEnumerable<QueryableFilter> queryableFilters = null)
{
IQueryable<ClassroomEntity> classroomQuery = ClassroomEntity.All().AsNoTracking();
// Loop through the supplied queryable filters (if any) to construct a dynamic LINQ-to-SQL queryable
foreach (var filter in queryableFilters ?? new List<QueryableFilter>())
{
try
{
classroomQuery = classroomQuery.BuildExpression(_context, filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare);
}
catch (ArgumentException ex)
{
// you probably should look at catching different exceptions now as joining is not required
}
}
query = classroomQuery.OrderBy(x => x.ClassroomId);
IEnumerable<IExportClassroom> results = await query.Select(ClassroomMapper).ToListAsync();
return results;
}
Testing it out
Since you didn't supply entity hierarchy, I experimented on one of my own:
public class Entity
{
public int Id { get; set; }
}
class Company: Entity
{
public string CompanyName { get; set; }
}
class Team: Entity
{
public string TeamName { get; set; }
public Company Company { get; set; }
}
class Employee: Entity
{
public string EmployeeName { get; set; }
public Team Team { get; set; }
}
// then i've got a test harness method as GetClassroomsAsync won't compile wothout your entities
class DynamicFilters<T> where T : Entity
{
private readonly DbContext _context;
public DynamicFilters(DbContext context)
{
_context = context;
}
public IEnumerable<T> Filter(IEnumerable<QueryableFilter> queryableFilters = null)
{
IQueryable<T> mainQuery = _context.Set<T>().AsQueryable().AsNoTracking();
// Loop through the supplied queryable filters (if any) to construct a dynamic LINQ-to-SQL queryable
foreach (var filter in queryableFilters ?? new List<QueryableFilter>())
{
mainQuery = mainQuery.BuildExpression(_context, filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare);
}
mainQuery = mainQuery.OrderBy(x => x.Id);
return mainQuery.ToList();
}
}
// --- DbContext
class MyDbContext : DbContext
{
public DbSet<Company> Companies{ get; set; }
public DbSet<Team> Teams { get; set; }
public DbSet<Employee> Employees { get; set; }
protected override void OnConfiguring(DbContextOptionsBuilder optionsBuilder)
{
optionsBuilder.UseSqlServer("Server=.\\SQLEXPRESS;Database=test;Trusted_Connection=true");
base.OnConfiguring(optionsBuilder);
}
}
// ---
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var context = new MyDbContext();
var someTableData = new DynamicFilters<Employee>(context).Filter(new
List<QueryableFilter> {new QueryableFilter {Name = "CompanyName", Value = "Microsoft" }});
}
With the above, and a filter CompanyName = "Microsoft" EF Core 3.1 generated me the following SQL:
SELECT [e].[Id], [e].[EmployeeName], [e].[TeamId]
FROM [Employees] AS [e]
LEFT JOIN [Teams] AS [t] ON [e].[TeamId] = [t].[Id]
LEFT JOIN [Companies] AS [c] ON [t].[CompanyId] = [c].[Id]
WHERE [c].[CompanyName] = N'Microsoft'
ORDER BY [e].[Id]
This approach seems to produce desired result but has one issue: column names must be unique across all your entities. This likely can be dealt with but since I don't know much specifics of your data model I'd defer it to you.

(Disclaimer: I've written code similar to this, but I haven't actually tested the code in this answer.)
Your BuildExpression takes one query (in the form of an IQueryable<T>) and returns another query. This constrains all your filters to be applied to the property of the parameter -- x.ClassroomId -- when you actually want to apply some of them to a property of a property of the parameter -- x.Organization.City.
I would suggest a GetFilterExpression method, which produces the filter expression off of some arbitrary base expression:
private static Expression GetFilterExpression(Expression baseExpr, string columnName, string value, QueryableFilterCompareEnum? compare = QueryableFilterCompareEnum.Equal) {
MemberExpression dataField;
try {
dataField = Expression.Property(baseExpr, columnName);
} catch (ArgumentException ex) {
if (ex.ParamName == "propertyName") {
throw new ArgumentException($"Base expression type does not have a \"{propertyName}\" field.", ex.ParamName);
} else {
throw new ArgumentException(ex.Message);
}
}
if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(value)) {
value = value.Trim();
}
ConstantExpression constant = Expression.Constant(value, typeof(string));
BinaryExpression binary = GetBinaryExpression(dataField, constant, compare);
return binary;
}
Within GetClassroomsAsync, you can either build the filter expression against the original ClassroomEntity parameter, or against the returned value of the Organization property on the parameter, by passing in a different expression:
public async Task<IEnumerable<IExportClassroom>> GetClassroomsAsync(IEnumerable<QueryableFilter> queryableFilters = null) {
var filters = queryableFilters?.ToList();
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(ClassroomEntity));
var orgExpr = Expression.Property(param, "Organization"); // equivalent of x.Organization
IQueryable<ClassroomEntity> query = ClassroomEntity.All().AsNoTracking();
if (filters is {}) {
// Map the filters to expressions, applied to the `x` or to the `x.Organization` as appropriate
var filterExpressions = filters.Select(filter => {
try {
return GetFilterExpression(param, filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare);
} catch (ArgumentException ex) {
if (ex.ParamName == "propertyName") {
return GetFilterExpression(orgExpr, filter.Name, filter.Value, filter.Compare);
} else {
throw new ArgumentException(ex.Message);
}
}
});
// LogicalCombined is shown later in the answer
query = query.Where(
Expression.Lambda<Func<ClassroomEntity, bool>>(LogicalCombined(filters))
);
}
query = query.OrderBy(x => x.ClassroomId);
IEnumerable<IExportClassroom> results = await query.Select(ClassroomMapper).ToListAsync();
return results;
}
LogicalCombined takes multiple bool-returning expressions and combines them into a single expression:
private static Expression LogicalCombined(IEnumerable<Expression> exprs, ExpressionType expressionType = ExpressionType.AndAlso) {
// ensure the expression type is a boolean operator
switch (expressionType) {
case ExpressionType.And:
case ExpressionType.AndAlso:
case ExpressionType.Or:
case ExpressionType.OrElse:
case ExpressionType.ExclusiveOr:
break;
default:
throw new ArgumentException("Invalid expression type for logically combining expressions.");
}
Expression? final = null;
foreach (var expr in exprs) {
if (final is null) {
final = expr;
continue;
}
final = Expression.MakeBinary(expressionType, final, expr);
}
return final;
}
Some suggestions:
As I've written it, GetFilterExpression is a static method. Since all the arguments (except the base expression) come from QueryableFilter, you might consider making it an instance method off of QueryableFilter.
I would also suggest changing GetBinaryExpression to use a dictionary to map from QueryableFilterCompareEnum to the built-in ExpressionType. Then, the implementation of GetBinaryExpression is just a wrapper for the built-in Expression.MakeBinary method:
private static Dictionary<QueryableFilterCompareEnum, ExpressionType> comparisonMapping = new Dictionary<QueryableFilterCompareEnum, ExpressionType> {
[QueryableFilterCompareEnum.NotEqual] = ExpressionType.NotEqual,
[QueryableFilterCompareEnum.GreaterThan] = ExpressionType.GreaterThan,
[QueryableFilterCompareEnum.GreaterThanOrEqual] = ExpressionType.GreaterThanOrEqual,
[QueryableFilterCompareEnum.LessThan] = ExpressionType.LessThan,
[QueryableFilterCompareEnum.LessThanOrEqual] = ExpressionType.LessThanOrEqual,
[QueryableFilterCompareEnum.Equal] = ExpressionType.Equal
}
private static Expression GetBinaryExpression(MemberExpression member, ConstantExpression constant, QueryableFilterCompareEnum? comparisonOperation) {
comparisonOperation = comparisonOperation ?? QueryableFilterCompareEnum.Equal;
var expressionType = comparisonMapping[comparisonOperation];
return Expression.MakeBinary(
expressionType,
member,
constant
);
}
Both GetFilterExpression and GetClassroomsAsync handle the possibility that the specified property doesn't exist on either ClassroomEntity or OrganizationEntity, by trying to construct the member-access expression and handling the thrown exception.
It might be clearer to use reflection to test if the property exists on either type or not.
More, you might consider storing a static HashSet<string> with all the valid fieldnames, and check against that.

Any easy way to see which IF condition is false?

I'm posting this question to find a simpler way of achieving a result.
We have a big IF statement that checks for NULL or string.empty. Something like this:
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.Name) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.last) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.init) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.cat1) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.history) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.cat2) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.year) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.month) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.retire) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.spouse) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.children) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.bday) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.hire)|| string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.death) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.JobName) || string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.More) ||
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.AndMore))
{
//Display message. Something like "Error: Name and Month is missing"
return;
}
Any solution I've found so far to address this is time-consuming, and would require writing more code.
Is there any way to know which value is string.IsNullOrEmpty without having to change this IF statement too much? Worse-case, I can check every single statement separately, but I would prefer not doing this.
Thanks.

No, there's no "magic" function that will tell you which of a series of expression in an OR statement are true. Also, since you're using the short-circuiting version, the statement will return true after the first true condition, so the remaining expressions are not even evaluated.
However, you could do something like this:
bool[] checks = {
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.Name) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.last) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.init) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.cat1) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.history) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.cat2) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.year) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.month) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.retire) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.spouse) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.children) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.bday) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.hire) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.death) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.JobName) , string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.More) ,
string.IsNullOrEmpty(Empl.AndMore)
};
if(checks.Any())
{
//Display message. Something like "Error: Name and Month is missing"
return;
}
now the checks variable holds the result of each expression.

I find this sort of an more elegant way to use ModelState.isValid.
Some reference: What is ModelState.IsValid valid for in ASP.NET MVC in NerdDinner?
For your model, you can add following annotation:
[Required(AllowEmptyStrings= false)]
public string Boo { get; set; }
When you do validation, try:
if (!ModelState.IsValid)
{
//Display message. Something like "Error: Name and Month is missing"
return;
}

Yes, write your own string extension method that does the same check, but also takes in a List and add the field name to the list. Declare the list of strings before the if and you will have a list of offending fields where your comment is.
This can be improved upon with a bit of reflection to automatically get the name and maybe make a few optimizations but it is on the right track.
Keep in mind that the first condition that violates the if statement will cause it to fail, so you will get an incomplete list (of one item) unless your if is constructed differently.
public static class StringExtensions
{
public static bool CheckIsNullOrEmptyAndListIt(this string field, string fieldName, List<string> naughties)
{
var result = String.IsNullOrEmpty(field);
if (result == true)
{
naughties.Add(fieldName);
}
return result;
}
}
}

using System.IO;
using System;
using System.Linq;
public class Program
{
public class Dog
{
public static string Name {get;set;}
public static string Race {get;set;}
}
public static bool validate(Dog dog)
{
bool val = true;
var y = dog.GetType()
.GetProperties()
.Select(p =>
{
object value =p.GetValue(dog,null);
if(string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.ToString())){ val=false; return false;}
else return true;
})
.ToArray();
return val;
}
public static void Main()
{
Dog dog= new Dog();
Dog.Name = "Peter";
Dog.Race = "";
if(validate(dog))
{
Console.WriteLine("Hello, World!");
}
}
}

You can use something like this :
public static class ValidationHelper
{
public static IEnumerable<string> FindEmptyProperties<T>(T target, params Expression<Func<T, string>>[] propertySelectors)
{
foreach (var propertySelector in propertySelectors)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(propertySelector.Compile()(target)))
{
var memberExpr = propertySelector.Body as MemberExpression;
yield return memberExpr.Member.Name;
}
}
}
}
Usage :
var failed = ValidationHelper.FindEmptyProperties(Empl, x => x.Name, x => x.last, x => x.init, x => x.cat1).ToList();
if (failed.Any())
{
throw new InvalidOperationException(
string.Format("Error: {0} is missing",
string.Join(", ", failed)));
}

If you use ASP.NET MVC maybe use DataAnnotations...
For the general c# context consider PostSharp aspect oriented library! Geat project!
Otherwise: Maybe a reflection solution using plain .NET ? (Created just for you! I think i keep for some own projects maybe)
Works with different types and you can control the targeted bindingflags.
Provides a common base class for your data transfer objects. (dto)
Reflection is performance optimized and working for generics as well!
public class Program
{
public void Main()
{
Empl test = new Empl()
{
TestProp = "blub",
TestInt = 1
};
if (test.ValidateProperties(Validations.CheckEmptyStringsAndZeroInts))
{
Console.WriteLine("validation passed");
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("validation failed");
}
}
}
private static class Validations
{
//put this in a static class with standard checks
public static Func<object, bool> CheckEmptyStringsAndZeroInts = o =>
{
if (o is string && string.IsNullOrEmpty((string)o))
{
return false;
}
else if (o is int && ((int) o) == 0)
{
return false;
}
// ignore other property types
return true;
};
}
// Derive all your models like this. deriving from an Empl class is still valid and working!
//[IncludeBindingFlagsForPropertyReflctionAttribute(/*your custom binding flags*/)] //can also override the binding flags in derived classes!
public class Empl : DtoBase<Empl>
{
public string TestProp { get; set; }
public int TestInt { get; set; }
// Your properties here
}
// Helps you to control the targeted properties. you can filter for public or protected members for example
public class IncludeBindingFlagsForPropertyReflctionAttribute : Attribute
{
public BindingFlags BindingFlags { get; }
public IncludeBindingFlagsForPropertyReflctionAttribute(BindingFlags propertySearchBindingFlags)
{
BindingFlags = propertySearchBindingFlags;
}
}
//Looks much. But used once as base class can do those validations for you
[IncludeBindingFlagsForPropertyReflction(BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance)]
public abstract class DtoBase<TDto> where TDto : DtoBase<TDto>
{
private static Dictionary<Type, List<PropertyInfo>> DtoPropertyInfosStorage { get; }
private List<PropertyInfo> DtoPropertyInfos => DtoPropertyInfosStorage[typeof (TDto)];
static DtoBase()
{
DtoPropertyInfosStorage = new Dictionary<Type, List<PropertyInfo>>();
Type tDto = typeof (TDto);
var includeBindingFlagsForProperty = GetAttribute(tDto);
BindingFlags defaultTargetFlags = BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public;
DtoPropertyInfosStorage.Add(typeof(TDto), new List<PropertyInfo>(typeof(TDto).GetProperties(includeBindingFlagsForProperty?.BindingFlags ?? defaultTargetFlags)));
}
private static IncludeBindingFlagsForPropertyReflctionAttribute GetAttribute(Type dtoType)
{
bool stopRecursion = !dtoType.IsSubclassOf(typeof(DtoBase<TDto>));
var includeBindingFlagsForProperty = dtoType.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(IncludeBindingFlagsForPropertyReflctionAttribute)).FirstOrDefault();
if (includeBindingFlagsForProperty == null && !stopRecursion)
{
return GetAttribute(dtoType.BaseType);
}
return null;
}
/// <summary>
/// You can handle your validation type in you validation function yourself.
/// </summary>
public bool ValidateProperties(Func<object, bool> validationFunction)
{
foreach (KeyValuePair<Type, List<PropertyInfo>> dtoPropertyInfo in DtoPropertyInfosStorage)
{
foreach (PropertyInfo propertyInfo in DtoPropertyInfos)
{
if (!validationFunction(propertyInfo.))
{
return false;
}
}
}
return true;
}
/// <summary>
/// You can pass your targeted property type like string to TPropertyType
/// <![CDATA[ Example:
/// if(ValidateProperties<string>(validate => !string.IsNullOrEmpty(validate)))
/// {
/// properties not empty?
/// }
/// ]]]]>
/// </summary>
public bool ValidateProperties<TPropertyType>(Func<TPropertyType, bool> validationFunction)
{
List<PropertyInfo> targetPropertyInfos =
DtoPropertyInfos.Where(prop => prop.PropertyType == typeof (TPropertyType))
.ToList();
foreach (PropertyInfo dtoPropertyInfo in targetPropertyInfos)
{
if (validationFunction((TPropertyType) dtoPropertyInfo.GetValue(this)))
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}

Add intellisense when writing lambda's for an Action<dynamic>

This question is related to this other question.
I have the following method:
public static T GetNewData<T>(params Action<dynamic>[] actions) where T : class, new()
{
dynamic dynamicData = new DeepObject();
foreach (var action in actions)
{
action(dynamicData);
}
return Converter.Convert<T>(dynamicData);
}
The users of this method will include less technical people, even non-developers and as such the easier writing calls to this method is the better. My sticking point right now is that by using Action<dynamic> as the parameter type there is no intellisense provided to the user. In the context I know that the intellisense should be acting as if the dynamic was in fact T.
So is their a way I could either: Tell Visual Studio to use type T for the intellisense or change the parameter to be Action<T> and somehow programmatically change it to be Action<dynamic> or Action<DeepObject> so that the call to it will succeed?
EDIT: To clarify, the types that I am using for T are not of type DeepObject and they do not inherit any standard interface, the use of DeepObject is to allow setting up nested types without the user needing to explicitly instantiate at each level. This was the original usage before adding the dynamic and DeepObject code:
ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>(
x => x.Property1 = ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<Property1Type>(),
x => x.Property1.Property2 = ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<Property2Type>(),
x => x.Property1.Property2.Property3 = ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<Property3Type>(),
x => x.Property1.Property2.Property3.Property4 = true);
Here is what it looks like now:
ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>(
x => x.Property1.Property2.Property3.Property4 = true);
EDIT: Here is the fully implemented solution based on nmclean's answer
public static DataBuilder<T> GetNewData<T>() where T : class, new()
{
return new DataBuilder<T>();
}
The DataBuilder Class:
public class DataBuilder<T>
{
public readonly T data;
public DataBuilder()
{
data = Activator.CreateInstance<T>();
}
public DataBuilder(T data)
{
this.data = data;
}
public DataBuilder<T> SetValue<T2>(Expression<Func<T, T2>> expression, T2 value)
{
var mExpr = GetMemberExpression(expression);
var obj = Recurse(mExpr);
var p = (PropertyInfo)mExpr.Member;
p.SetValue(obj, value);
return this;
}
public T Build()
{
return data;
}
public object Recurse(MemberExpression expr)
{
if (expr.Expression.Type != typeof(T))
{
var pExpr = GetMemberExpression(expr.Expression);
var parent = Recurse(pExpr);
var pInfo = (PropertyInfo) pExpr.Member;
var obj = pInfo.GetValue(parent);
if (obj == null)
{
obj = Activator.CreateInstance(pInfo.PropertyType);
pInfo.SetValue(parent, obj);
}
return obj;
}
return data;
}
private static MemberExpression GetMemberExpression(Expression expr)
{
var member = expr as MemberExpression;
var unary = expr as UnaryExpression;
return member ?? (unary != null ? unary.Operand as MemberExpression : null);
}
private static MemberExpression GetMemberExpression<T2>(Expression<Func<T, T2>> expr)
{
return GetMemberExpression(expr.Body);
}
}
The Usage:
ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>()
.SetValue(x=> x.Property1.EnumProperty, EnumType.Own)
.SetValue(x=> x.Property2.Property3.Property4.BoolProperty, true)
.Build();

Do not use Action<dynamic>, use Action<T>with method's constraint where T:DeepObject. Users will get intellisence and ability to use strongly typed objects:
public static DeepObject GetNewData<T>(params Action<T>[] actions)
where T : DeepObject, //restrict user only inheritors of DeepObject
new() //and require constructor
{
var data = new T();
foreach (var action in actions)
{
action(data);
}
return data;
}

Does the user need to access unknown properties or add new ones? If not, using dynamic objects seems like a step backwards. If your desired syntax does compile as an Action<T>, I think you should just declare it that way and then go with your first instinct of using the LINQ Expression API to decide how to interpret the code.
Unfortunately, although statements, such as an assignment, are part of the API, C# doesn't support converting them to expression trees. This is not allowed:
public static T GetNewData<T>(params Expression<Action<T>>[] actions)
where T : class, new() {
...
}
...
ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>(
x => x.Property1.Property2.Property3.Property4 = true);
Only single-line expressions that would have a return a value are supported. So I think the best you could do is something like this:
public class Assignment<T> {
public readonly Expression Expression;
public readonly object Value;
public Assignment(Expression<Func<T, object>> expression, object value) {
Expression = expression;
Value = value;
}
}
...
public static T GetNewData<T>(params Assignment<T>[] assignments)
where T : class, new() {
var data = Activator.CreateInstance<T>();
foreach (var assignment in assignments) {
// todo:
// - pull property names from assignment.Expression
// - initialize nested properties / assign to assignment.Value
}
return data;
}
...
ExampleDataFactory.GetNewData<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>(
new Assignment<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>(
x => x.Property1.Property2.Property3.Property4, true));
Getting the property names from an expression tree of chained property access is not too complicated. Here is one implementation.
Of course, the new Assignment<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>(...) is ugly and repetitive, so maybe it could be restructured to something like this:
var newData = ExampleDataFactory.NewData<ServicesAndFeaturesInfo>();
newData.Add(x => x.Property1.Property2.Property3.Property4, true);
newData.Add(...);
...
newData.Get();

Can my enums have friendly names? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Associating enums with strings in C#
(38 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I have the following enum
public enum myEnum
{
ThisNameWorks,
This Name doesn't work
Neither.does.this;
}
Is it not possible to have enums with "friendly names"?

You could use the Description attribute, as Yuriy suggested. The following extension method makes it easy to get the description for a given value of the enum:
public static string GetDescription(this Enum value)
{
Type type = value.GetType();
string name = Enum.GetName(type, value);
if (name != null)
{
FieldInfo field = type.GetField(name);
if (field != null)
{
DescriptionAttribute attr =
Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(field,
typeof(DescriptionAttribute)) as DescriptionAttribute;
if (attr != null)
{
return attr.Description;
}
}
}
return null;
}
You can use it like this:
public enum MyEnum
{
[Description("Description for Foo")]
Foo,
[Description("Description for Bar")]
Bar
}
MyEnum x = MyEnum.Foo;
string description = x.GetDescription();

Enum value names must follow the same naming rules as all identifiers in C#, therefore only first name is correct.

If you have the following enum:
public enum MyEnum {
First,
Second,
Third
}
You can declare Extension Methods for MyEnum (like you can for any other type). I just whipped this up:
namespace Extension {
public static class ExtensionMethods {
public static string EnumValue(this MyEnum e) {
switch (e) {
case MyEnum.First:
return "First Friendly Value";
case MyEnum.Second:
return "Second Friendly Value";
case MyEnum.Third:
return "Third Friendly Value";
}
return "Horrible Failure!!";
}
}
}
With this Extension Method, the following is now legal:
Console.WriteLine(MyEnum.First.EnumValue());
Hope this helps!!

No, but you can use the DescriptionAttribute to accomplish what you're looking for.

You can use the Description attribute to get that friendly name. You can use the code below:
public static string ToStringEnums(Enum en)
{
Type type = en.GetType();
MemberInfo[] memInfo = type.GetMember(en.ToString());
if (memInfo != null && memInfo.Length > 0)
{
object[] attrs = memInfo[0].GetCustomAttributes(typeof(DescriptionAttribute), false);
if (attrs != null && attrs.Length > 0)
return ((DescriptionAttribute)attrs[0]).Description;
}
return en.ToString();
}
An example of when you would want to use this method: When your enum value is EncryptionProviderType and you want enumVar.Tostring() to return "Encryption Provider Type".
Prerequisite: All enum members should be applied with the attribute [Description("String to be returned by Tostring()")].
Example enum:
enum ExampleEnum
{
[Description("One is one")]
ValueOne = 1,
[Description("Two is two")]
ValueTow = 2
}
And in your class, you would use it like this:
ExampleEnum enumVar = ExampleEnum.ValueOne;
Console.WriteLine(ToStringEnums(enumVar));

One problem with this trick is that description attribute cannot be localized. I do like a technique by Sacha Barber where he creates his own version of Description attribute which would pick up values from the corresponding resource manager.
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/WPF/FriendlyEnums.aspx
Although the article is around a problem that's generally faced by WPF developers when binding to enums, you can jump directly to the part where he creates the LocalizableDescriptionAttribute.

Some great solutions have already been posted. When I encountered this problem, I wanted to go both ways: convert an enum into a description, and convert a string matching a description into an enum.
I have two variants, slow and fast. Both convert from enum to string and string to enum. My problem is that I have enums like this, where some elements need attributes and some don't. I don't want to put attributes on elements that don't need them. I have about a hundred of these total currently:
public enum POS
{
CC, // Coordinating conjunction
CD, // Cardinal Number
DT, // Determiner
EX, // Existential there
FW, // Foreign Word
IN, // Preposision or subordinating conjunction
JJ, // Adjective
[System.ComponentModel.Description("WP$")]
WPDollar, //$ Possessive wh-pronoun
WRB, // Wh-adverb
[System.ComponentModel.Description("#")]
Hash,
[System.ComponentModel.Description("$")]
Dollar,
[System.ComponentModel.Description("''")]
DoubleTick,
[System.ComponentModel.Description("(")]
LeftParenth,
[System.ComponentModel.Description(")")]
RightParenth,
[System.ComponentModel.Description(",")]
Comma,
[System.ComponentModel.Description(".")]
Period,
[System.ComponentModel.Description(":")]
Colon,
[System.ComponentModel.Description("``")]
DoubleBackTick,
};
The first method for dealing with this is slow, and is based on suggestions I saw here and around the net. It's slow because we are reflecting for every conversion:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
namespace CustomExtensions
{
/// <summary>
/// uses extension methods to convert enums with hypens in their names to underscore and other variants
public static class EnumExtensions
{
/// <summary>
/// Gets the description string, if available. Otherwise returns the name of the enum field
/// LthWrapper.POS.Dollar.GetString() yields "$", an impossible control character for enums
/// </summary>
/// <param name="value"></param>
/// <returns></returns>
public static string GetStringSlow(this Enum value)
{
Type type = value.GetType();
string name = Enum.GetName(type, value);
if (name != null)
{
System.Reflection.FieldInfo field = type.GetField(name);
if (field != null)
{
System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute attr =
Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(field,
typeof(System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute)) as System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute;
if (attr != null)
{
//return the description if we have it
name = attr.Description;
}
}
}
return name;
}
/// <summary>
/// Converts a string to an enum field using the string first; if that fails, tries to find a description
/// attribute that matches.
/// "$".ToEnum<LthWrapper.POS>() yields POS.Dollar
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam>
/// <param name="value"></param>
/// <returns></returns>
public static T ToEnumSlow<T>(this string value) //, T defaultValue)
{
T theEnum = default(T);
Type enumType = typeof(T);
//check and see if the value is a non attribute value
try
{
theEnum = (T)Enum.Parse(enumType, value);
}
catch (System.ArgumentException e)
{
bool found = false;
foreach (T enumValue in Enum.GetValues(enumType))
{
System.Reflection.FieldInfo field = enumType.GetField(enumValue.ToString());
System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute attr =
Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(field,
typeof(System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute)) as System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute;
if (attr != null && attr.Description.Equals(value))
{
theEnum = enumValue;
found = true;
break;
}
}
if( !found )
throw new ArgumentException("Cannot convert " + value + " to " + enumType.ToString());
}
return theEnum;
}
}
}
The problem with this is that you're doing reflection every time. I haven't measured the performance hit from doing so, but it seems alarming. Worse we are computing these expensive conversions repeatedly, without caching them.
Instead we can use a static constructor to populate some dictionaries with this conversion information, then just look up this information when needed. Apparently static classes (required for extension methods) can have constructors and fields :)
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
namespace CustomExtensions
{
/// <summary>
/// uses extension methods to convert enums with hypens in their names to underscore and other variants
/// I'm not sure this is a good idea. While it makes that section of the code much much nicer to maintain, it
/// also incurs a performance hit via reflection. To circumvent this, I've added a dictionary so all the lookup can be done once at
/// load time. It requires that all enums involved in this extension are in this assembly.
/// </summary>
public static class EnumExtensions
{
//To avoid collisions, every Enum type has its own hash table
private static readonly Dictionary<Type, Dictionary<object,string>> enumToStringDictionary = new Dictionary<Type,Dictionary<object,string>>();
private static readonly Dictionary<Type, Dictionary<string, object>> stringToEnumDictionary = new Dictionary<Type, Dictionary<string, object>>();
static EnumExtensions()
{
//let's collect the enums we care about
List<Type> enumTypeList = new List<Type>();
//probe this assembly for all enums
System.Reflection.Assembly assembly = System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
Type[] exportedTypes = assembly.GetExportedTypes();
foreach (Type type in exportedTypes)
{
if (type.IsEnum)
enumTypeList.Add(type);
}
//for each enum in our list, populate the appropriate dictionaries
foreach (Type type in enumTypeList)
{
//add dictionaries for this type
EnumExtensions.enumToStringDictionary.Add(type, new Dictionary<object,string>() );
EnumExtensions.stringToEnumDictionary.Add(type, new Dictionary<string,object>() );
Array values = Enum.GetValues(type);
//its ok to manipulate 'value' as object, since when we convert we're given the type to cast to
foreach (object value in values)
{
System.Reflection.FieldInfo fieldInfo = type.GetField(value.ToString());
//check for an attribute
System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute attribute =
Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(fieldInfo,
typeof(System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute)) as System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute;
//populate our dictionaries
if (attribute != null)
{
EnumExtensions.enumToStringDictionary[type].Add(value, attribute.Description);
EnumExtensions.stringToEnumDictionary[type].Add(attribute.Description, value);
}
else
{
EnumExtensions.enumToStringDictionary[type].Add(value, value.ToString());
EnumExtensions.stringToEnumDictionary[type].Add(value.ToString(), value);
}
}
}
}
public static string GetString(this Enum value)
{
Type type = value.GetType();
string aString = EnumExtensions.enumToStringDictionary[type][value];
return aString;
}
public static T ToEnum<T>(this string value)
{
Type type = typeof(T);
T theEnum = (T)EnumExtensions.stringToEnumDictionary[type][value];
return theEnum;
}
}
}
Look how tight the conversion methods are now. The only flaw I can think of is that this requires all the converted enums to be in the current assembly. Also, I only bother with exported enums, but you could change that if you wish.
This is how to call the methods
string x = LthWrapper.POS.Dollar.GetString();
LthWrapper.POS y = "PRP$".ToEnum<LthWrapper.POS>();

public enum myEnum
{
ThisNameWorks,
This_Name_can_be_used_instead,
}

After reading many resources regarding this topic, including StackOverFlow, I find that not all solutions are working properly. Below is our attempt to fix this.
Basically, We take the friendly name of an Enum from a DescriptionAttribute if it exists.
If it does not We use RegEx to determine the words within the Enum name and add spaces.
Next version, we will use another Attribute to flag whether we can/should take the friendly name from a localizable resource file.
Below are the test cases. Please report if you have another test case that do not pass.
public static class EnumHelper
{
public static string ToDescription(Enum value)
{
if (value == null)
{
return string.Empty;
}
if (!Enum.IsDefined(value.GetType(), value))
{
return string.Empty;
}
FieldInfo fieldInfo = value.GetType().GetField(value.ToString());
if (fieldInfo != null)
{
DescriptionAttribute[] attributes =
fieldInfo.GetCustomAttributes(typeof (DescriptionAttribute), false) as DescriptionAttribute[];
if (attributes != null && attributes.Length > 0)
{
return attributes[0].Description;
}
}
return StringHelper.ToFriendlyName(value.ToString());
}
}
public static class StringHelper
{
public static bool IsNullOrWhiteSpace(string value)
{
return value == null || string.IsNullOrEmpty(value.Trim());
}
public static string ToFriendlyName(string value)
{
if (value == null) return string.Empty;
if (value.Trim().Length == 0) return string.Empty;
string result = value;
result = string.Concat(result.Substring(0, 1).ToUpperInvariant(), result.Substring(1, result.Length - 1));
const string pattern = #"([A-Z]+(?![a-z])|\d+|[A-Z][a-z]+|(?![A-Z])[a-z]+)+";
List<string> words = new List<string>();
Match match = Regex.Match(result, pattern);
if (match.Success)
{
Group group = match.Groups[1];
foreach (Capture capture in group.Captures)
{
words.Add(capture.Value);
}
}
return string.Join(" ", words.ToArray());
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void TestFriendlyName()
{
string[][] cases =
{
new string[] {null, string.Empty},
new string[] {string.Empty, string.Empty},
new string[] {" ", string.Empty},
new string[] {"A", "A"},
new string[] {"z", "Z"},
new string[] {"Pascal", "Pascal"},
new string[] {"camel", "Camel"},
new string[] {"PascalCase", "Pascal Case"},
new string[] {"ABCPascal", "ABC Pascal"},
new string[] {"PascalABC", "Pascal ABC"},
new string[] {"Pascal123", "Pascal 123"},
new string[] {"Pascal123ABC", "Pascal 123 ABC"},
new string[] {"PascalABC123", "Pascal ABC 123"},
new string[] {"123Pascal", "123 Pascal"},
new string[] {"123ABCPascal", "123 ABC Pascal"},
new string[] {"ABC123Pascal", "ABC 123 Pascal"},
new string[] {"camelCase", "Camel Case"},
new string[] {"camelABC", "Camel ABC"},
new string[] {"camel123", "Camel 123"},
};
foreach (string[] givens in cases)
{
string input = givens[0];
string expected = givens[1];
string output = StringHelper.ToFriendlyName(input);
Assert.AreEqual(expected, output);
}
}
}

They follow the same naming rules as variable names.
Therefore they should not contain spaces.
Also what you are suggesting would be very bad practice anyway.

Enum names live under the same rules as normal variable names, i.e. no spaces or dots in the middle of the names... I still consider the first one to be rather friendly though...

This is a terrible idea, but it does work.
public enum myEnum
{
ThisNameWorks,
ThisNameDoesntWork149141331,// This Name doesn't work
NeitherDoesThis1849204824// Neither.does.this;
}
class Program
{
private static unsafe void ChangeString(string original, string replacement)
{
if (original.Length < replacement.Length)
throw new ArgumentException();
fixed (char* pDst = original)
fixed (char* pSrc = replacement)
{
// Update the length of the original string
int* lenPtr = (int*)pDst;
lenPtr[-1] = replacement.Length;
// Copy the characters
for (int i = 0; i < replacement.Length; i++)
pDst[i] = pSrc[i];
}
}
public static unsafe void Initialize()
{
ChangeString(myEnum.ThisNameDoesntWork149141331.ToString(), "This Name doesn't work");
ChangeString(myEnum.NeitherDoesThis1849204824.ToString(), "Neither.does.this");
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine(myEnum.ThisNameWorks);
Console.WriteLine(myEnum.ThisNameDoesntWork149141331);
Console.WriteLine(myEnum.NeitherDoesThis1849204824);
Initialize();
Console.WriteLine(myEnum.ThisNameWorks);
Console.WriteLine(myEnum.ThisNameDoesntWork149141331);
Console.WriteLine(myEnum.NeitherDoesThis1849204824);
}
Requirements
Your enum names must have the same number of characters or more than the string that you want to it to be.
Your enum names shouldn't be repeated anywhere, just in case string interning messes things up
Why this is a bad idea (a few reasons)
Your enum names become ugly beause of the requirements
It relies on you calling the initialization method early enough
Unsafe pointers
If the internal format of string changes, e.g. if the length field is moved, you're screwed
If Enum.ToString() is ever changed so that it returns only a copy, you're screwed
Raymond Chen will complain about your use of undocumented features, and how it's your fault that the CLR team couldn't make an optimization to cut run time by 50%, during his next .NET week.

I suppose that you want to show your enum values to the user, therefore, you want them to have some friendly name.
Here's my suggestion:
Use an enum type pattern. Although it takes some effort to implement, it is really worth it.
public class MyEnum
{
public static readonly MyEnum Enum1=new MyEnum("This will work",1);
public static readonly MyEnum Enum2=new MyEnum("This.will.work.either",2);
public static readonly MyEnum[] All=new []{Enum1,Enum2};
private MyEnum(string name,int value)
{
Name=name;
Value=value;
}
public string Name{get;set;}
public int Value{get;set;}
public override string ToString()
{
return Name;
}
}