Let's look at this code:
IList<IHouseAnnouncement> list = new List<IHouseAnnouncement>();
var table = adapter.GetData(); //get data from repository object -> DataTable
if (table.Rows.Count >= 1)
{
for (int i = 0; i < table.Rows.Count; i++)
{
var anno = new HouseAnnouncement();
anno.Area = float.Parse(table.Rows[i][table.areaColumn].ToString());
anno.City = table.Rows[i][table.cityColumn].ToString();
list.Add(anno);
}
}
return list;
Is it better way to write this in less code and better fashion (must be :-) )? Maybe using lambda (but let me know how)?
Thanks in advance!
Just FYI, you're never adding the new HouseAnnouncement to your list, and your loop will never execute for the last row, but I'm assuming those are errors in the example rather than in your actual code.
You could do something like this:
return adapter.GetData().Rows.Cast<DataRow>().Select(row =>
new HouseAnnouncement()
{
Area = Convert.ToSingle(row["powierzchnia"]),
City = (string)row["miasto"],
}).ToList();
I usually go for readability over brevity, but I feel like this is pretty readable.
Note that while you could still cache the DataTable and use table.powierzchniaColumn in the lambda, I eliminated that so that you didn't use a closure that wasn't really necessary (closures introduce substantial complexity to the internal implementation of the lambda, so I avoid them if possible).
If it's important to you to keep the column references as they are, then you can do it like this:
using (var table = adapter.GetData())
{
return table.Rows.Cast<DataRow>().Select(row =>
new HouseAnnouncement()
{
Area = Convert.ToSingle(row[table.powierzchniaColumn]),
City = (string)row[table.miastoColumn],
}).ToList();
}
This will add complexity to the actual IL that the compiler generates, but should do the trick for you.
You could do something like this in Linq:
var table = adapter.GetData();
var q = from row in table.Rows.Cast<DataRow>()
select new HouseAnnouncement()
{ Area = float.Parse(row[table.areaColumn].ToString()),
City = row[table.cityColumn].ToString()
};
return q.ToList();
Your "if statement" is not necessary. Your "for loop" already takes care of that case.
Also, your "for loop" will not execute when the number of your Table Rows is 1. This seems like a mistake, and not by design, but I could be wrong. If you want to fix this, just take out the "-1":
for (int i = 0; i < table.Rows.Count; i++)
Well, for one thing, you appear to have an off-by-one error:
for (int i = 0; i < table.Rows.Count - 1; i++)
{
}
If your table has three rows, this will run while i is less than 3 - 1, or 2, which means it'll run for rows 0 and 1 but not for row 2. This may not be what you intend.
Can't go much simpler that one for-loop and no if-statements:
var table = adapter.GetData(); //get data from repository object -> DataTable
IList<IHouseAnnouncement> list = new List<IHouseAnnouncement>(table.Rows.Count);
for (int i = 0; i < list.Length; i++)
{
list[i] = new HouseAnnouncement();
list[i].Area = float.Parse(table.Rows[i][table.areaColumn].ToString());
list[i].City = table.Rows[i][table.cityColumn].ToString();
}
return list;
It takes more characters than linq-version, but is parsed faster by programmer's brain. :)
Readability is, to me, preferable to being succinct with your code--as long as performance is not a victim. Also, I am sure that anyone who later has to maintain the code will appreciate it as well.
Even when I am maintaining my own code, I don't want to look at it, say a couple of months later, and think "what the hell was I trying to accomplish"
I might do something like this:
var table = adapter.GetData(); //get data from repository object -> DataTable
return table.Rows.Take(table.Rows.Count-1).Select(row => new HouseAnnouncement() {
Area = float.Parse(row[table.powierzchniaColumn].ToString()),
City = row[table.miastoColumn].ToString()
}).ToList();
Related
Hi i'm trying to setup simple test data.
I simply want to take a collection which is smallish and make it bigger by add itself multiple times.
After I;ve added them together i want to re-number the property LineNumber
so that there are no duplicates and that it goes in order. 1,2,3,4....
no matter what i try it doesn't seem to work and i cant see the mistake.
var sampleTemplateLine = dataContext.TemplateFileLines.ToList();
*//tired this doesnt work either*
//List<TemplateFileLine> lineRange = new List<TemplateFileLine>();
//lineRange.AddRange(sampleTemplateLine);
//lineRange.AddRange(sampleTemplateLine);
//lineRange.AddRange(sampleTemplateLine);
//lineRange.AddRange(sampleTemplateLine);
var allProducts = sampleTemplateLine
.Concat(sampleTemplateLine)
.Concat(sampleTemplateLine)
.Concat(sampleTemplateLine)
.ToList();
int i = 1;
foreach (var item in allProducts)
{
item.LineNumber = i;
i++;
}
this doesnt seem to work either
//re-number the line number
var total = allProducts.Count();
for (int i =0; i < total; i++)
{
allProducts[i].LineNumber = i+1;
}
PROBLEM: below RETURN 4 when i'm expecting 1
var itemthing = allProducts.Where(x => x.LineNumber == 17312).ToList();
You are adding the same objects multiple times. You wold have to add new objects or clone the ones you have.
The problem is they are pointing the same object. So if you change a property it changes all the pointed objects at the same
You can use Clone method if it exist, if not you can create your own Clone method like in this question.
Basically, is there a way to write this:
for (int i = 0; i < modelOne.PaymentsPerDate?.Count; i++)
{
modelOne.PaymentsPerDate[i].Payment = modelTwo.PaymentsPerDate[i].Payment;
}
using LINQ?
Not really. LINQ is "Language Integrate Query". It's not really intended for modifying.
Now, if you wanted to abuse the process, this might work:
modelOne.PaymentsPerDate.Zip(modelTwo.PaymentsPerDate, (m1, m2)=> m1.Payment = m2.Payment);
I found this question but it's being used with an XML file so I don't really understand what is going on.
What I want to do is get my list of objects to get populated in my for loop. Right now I have this:
for (int i = 0; i < dogs.Length; i++)
{
dogs[i] = new Dog();
}
dogs[0].PictureBox = picDog0;
dogs[1].PictureBox = picDog1;
dogs[2].PictureBox = picDog2;
dogs[3].PictureBox = picDog3;
I want to do something like this:
for (int i = 0; i < dogs.Length; i++)
{
dogs[i] = new Dog();
dogs[i].PictureBox = StringToVariable("picDog" + i);
}
PictureBox is a property field in case that makes a difference.
StringToVariable() is the thing I don't know about. I don't even know what it would be called to search for it.
It's impossible to say for sure without a good, minimal, complete code example. But I would expect that the following statement should work in your scenario:
dogs[i].PictureBox = (PictureBox)Controls.Find("picDog" + i, true)[0];
That will search the children of the current control (which I assume in this case is your Form subclass) for each control in turn. This is somewhat inefficient, as it has to search the controls collection for each item, but as long as you have a relatively small number of items, this is likely not a problem.
Depending on how your Form is set up, the following might also work:
string prefix = "picDog";
foreach (PictureBox pictureBox in Controls.OfType<PictureBox>())
{
if (pictureBox.Name.StartsWith(prefix))
{
int index;
if (int.TryParse(pictureBox.Name.Substring(prefix.Length), out index))
{
dogs[index] = pictureBox;
}
}
}
That version inspects each child control just once, attempting to parse an index appended to the initial text of "picDog", and if it's successful, using that index to assign to your array directly. This has the advantage of scaling well to larger lists of controls, but may be overkill in your case.
Note that in both of the above examples I've left out any error checking. In either example, you would probably want to add some kind of handling in case (for the first example) the desired control couldn't be found, or (for the second example) if you find a control for which you can't parse the index, or fail to fill in one of the elements of the dogs array.
If for some reason neither of the above examples seem to work for you, please edit your post so that it includes a better code example.
Sometimes a simple solution can work well. How about this?
var picDogs = new [] { picDog0, picDog1, picDog2, picDog3 };
for (int i = 0; i < dogs.Length; i++)
{
dogs[i] = new Dog();
dogs[i].PictureBox = picDogs[i];
}
You could even do this:
var dogs = new [] { picDog0, picDog1, picDog2, picDog3 }
.Select(picDog => new Dog() { PictureBox = picDog })
.ToArray();
Iterating through a datatable that contains about 40 000 records using for-loop takes almost 4 minutes. Inside the loop I'm just reading the value of a specific column of each row and concatinating it to a string.
I'm not opening any DB connections or something, as its a function which recieves a datatable, iterate through it and returns a string.
Is there any faster way of doing this?
Code goes here:
private string getListOfFileNames(Datatable listWithFileNames)
{
string whereClause = "";
if (listWithFileNames.Columns.Contains("Filename"))
{
whereClause = "where filename in (";
for (int j = 0; j < listWithFileNames.Rows.Count; j++)
whereClause += " '" + listWithFileNames.Rows[j]["Filename"].ToString() + "',";
}
whereClause = whereClause.Remove(whereClause.Length - 1, 1);
whereClause += ")";
return whereClause;
}
Are you using a StringBuilder to concat the strings rather than just regular string concatenation?
Are you pulling back any more columns from the database then you really need to? If so, try not to. Only pull back the column(s) that you need.
Are you pulling back any more rows from the database then you really need to? If so, try not to. Only pull back the row(s) that you need.
How much memory does the computer have? Is it maxing out when you run the program or getting close to it? Is the processor at the max much or at all? If you're using too much memory then you may need to do more streaming. This means not pulling the whole result set into memory (i.e. a datatable) but reading each line one at a time. It also might mean that rather than concatting the results into a string (or StringBuilder ) that you might need to be appending them to a file so as to not take up so much memory.
Following linq statement have a where clause on first column and concat the third column in a variable.
string CSVValues = String.Join(",", dtOutput.AsEnumerable()
.Where(a => a[0].ToString() == value)
.Select(b => b[2].ToString()));
Step 1 - run it through a profiler, make sure you're looking at the right thing when optimizing.
Case in point, we had an issue we were sure was slow database interactions and when we ran the profiler the db barely showed up.
That said, possible things to try:
if you have the memory available, convert the query to a list, this
will force a full db read. Otherwise the linq will probably load in
chunks doing multiple db queries.
push the work to the db - if you can create a query than trims down
the data you are looking at, or even calculates the string for you,
that might be faster
if this is something where the query is run often but the data rarely
changes, consider copying the data to a local db (eg. sqlite) if
you're using a remote db.
if you're using the local sql-server, try sqlite, it's faster for
many things.
var value = dataTable
.AsEnumerable()
.Select(row => row.Field<string>("columnName"));
var colValueStr = string.join(",", value.ToArray());
Try adding a dummy column in your table with an expression. Something like this:
DataColumn dynColumn = new DataColumn();
{
dynColumn.ColumnName = "FullName";
dynColumn.DataType = System.Type.GetType("System.String");
dynColumn.Expression = "LastName+' '-ABC";
}
UserDataSet.Tables(0).Columns.Add(dynColumn);
Later in your code you can use this dummy column instead. You don't need to rotate any loop to concatenate a string.
Try using parallel for loop..
Here's the sample code..
Parallel.ForEach(dataTable.AsEnumerable(),
item => { str += ((item as DataRow)["ColumnName"]).ToString(); });
I've separated the job in small pieces and let each piece be handled by its own Thread. You can fine tune the number of thread by varying the nthreads number. Try it with different numbers so you can see the difference in performance.
private string getListOfFileNames(DataTable listWithFileNames)
{
string whereClause = String.Empty;
if (listWithFileNames.Columns.Contains("Filename"))
{
int nthreads = 8; // You can play with this parameter to fine tune and get your best time.
int load = listWithFileNames.Rows.Count / nthreads; // This will tell how many items reach thread mush process.
List<ManualResetEvent> mres = new List<ManualResetEvent>(); // This guys will help the method to know when the work is done.
List<StringBuilder> sbuilders = new List<StringBuilder>(); // This will be used to concatenate each bis string.
for (int i = 0; i < nthreads; i++)
{
sbuilders.Add(new StringBuilder()); // Create a new string builder
mres.Add(new ManualResetEvent(false)); // Create a not singaled ManualResetEvent.
if (i == 0) // We know were to put the very begining of your where clause
{
sbuilders[0].Append("where filename in (");
}
// Calculate the last item to be processed by the current thread
int end = i == (nthreads - 1) ? listWithFileNames.Rows.Count : i * load + load;
// Create a new thread to deal with a part of the big table.
Thread t = new Thread(new ParameterizedThreadStart((x) =>
{
// This is the inside of the thread, we must unbox the parameters
object[] vars = x as object[];
int lIndex = (int)vars[0];
int uIndex = (int)vars[1];
ManualResetEvent ev = vars[2] as ManualResetEvent;
StringBuilder sb = vars[3] as StringBuilder;
bool coma = false;
// Concatenate the rows in the string builder
for (int j = lIndex; j < uIndex; j++)
{
if (coma)
{
sb.Append(", ");
}
else
{
coma = true;
}
sb.Append("'").Append(listWithFileNames.Rows[j]["Filename"]).Append("'");
}
// Tell the parent Thread that your job is done.
ev.Set();
}));
// Start the thread with the calculated params
t.Start(new object[] { i * load, end, mres[i], sbuilders[i] });
}
// Wait for all child threads to finish their job
WaitHandle.WaitAll(mres.ToArray());
// Concatenate the big string.
for (int i = 1; i < nthreads; i++)
{
sbuilders[0].Append(", ").Append(sbuilders[i]);
}
sbuilders[0].Append(")"); // Close your where clause
// Return the finished where clause
return sbuilders[0].ToString();
}
// Returns empty
return whereClause;
}
I have a table with items that are displayed by their SortOrder. The SortOrders are not incremented very well, with values skipping anywhere from 1-100. What I want to do is flip-flop the SortOrder values of two items that are closest together, without necessarily knowing how close together they are. For example:
ItemX.SortOrder = 5;
ItemY.SortOrder = 26;
Assume no items have a sort order between 5-26.
My code needs to switch this to:
ItemX.SortOrder = 26;
ItemY.SortOrder = 5;
For some reason, my code is switching SortOrders with random items, such that:
ItemX.SortOrder = 5;
ItemY.SortOrder = 26;
ItemZ.SortOrder = 34;
Becomes:
ItemX.SortOrder = 34;
ItemY.SortOrder = 26;
ItemZ.SortOrder = 5;
I think its because the results of my query aren't ordered the way I am picturing them. Here is my query code. If anything else is needed, just let me know.
itemToSwitch = DataSource.Items.Where(item => item.SortOrder > currentItem.SortOrder).First();
int? next = itemToSwitch.SortOrder;
int? previous = currentItem.SortOrder;
currentItem.SortOrder = next;
itemToSwitch.SortOrder = previous;
Sorry if my question is difficult to read or jumbled. I'm trying to be as clear as possible.
I'm suspecting you actually want:
var sorted = DataSource.Items.OrderBy(item => item.SortOrder);
If you're reusing it, a .ToList() might help
Why do not use:
var greatesItem = DataSource.Items.OrderBy(item => item.SortOrder).Fisrt();
var smallestItem = DataSource.Items.OrderBy(item => item.SortOrder).Last();
var tempOrder = greatesItem.SortOrder;
greatesItem.SortOrder = smallestItem.SortOrder;
smallestItem.SortOrder = tempOrder;
Then you submit the modification to the database. (I suggest you to do a function with that).