If I apply the LINQ Take extension method to a SortedList<int, int>, how do I convert the result to a new SortedList<int, int>?
From the runtime error I'm getting, the result of the Take method is an EnumerablePartition which cannot be cast to SortedList<int, int>
Main method in console App compiles OK, but throws an error at runtime when casting the result of list.Take(2) to SortedList
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Console.WriteLine("List");
var list = new SortedList<int, int>();
list.Add(2, 10);
list.Add(8, 9);
list.Add(3, 15);
foreach (KeyValuePair<int, int> item in list){
Console.WriteLine(item.Value);
};
Console.WriteLine("Short List");
var shortlist = (SortedList<int, int>)list.Take(2);
foreach (KeyValuePair<int, int> item in shortlist)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.Value);
};
Console.Read();
}
I would have expected the result of the Take method to be a new SortedList<int, int> or at least that it would be possible to cast to a SortedList<int, int> given that this is the original type.
Here's the runtime error I'm getting:
Unable to cast object of type 'EnumerablePartition`1[System.Collections.Generic.KeyValuePair`2[System.Int32,System.Int32]]' to type 'System.Collections.Generic.SortedList`2[System.Int32,System.Int32]'
EDIT:
I'm relatively new to LINQ and Generics, but thanks to excellent answers provided, I've created a new extension method for readability:
static class Extensions {
public static SortedList<TKey, TValue> ToSortedList<TKey, TValue>(this IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue>> collection)
{
var dictionary = collection.ToDictionary(kvp => kvp.Key, kvp => kvp.Value);
return new SortedList<TKey, TValue>(dictionary);
}
}
Now, to create my shortlist:
var shortlist = list.Take(2).ToSortedList();
I was thinking that something like the above might already be available!
I would have expected the result of the Take method to be a new SortedList or at least that it would be possible to cast to a SortedList given that this is the original type.
Well, it does not quite work that way. If you Take(2) from a bag of sweets, you have two sweets. You don't magically have a new bag with two sweets in it just because the original sweets came in a bag.
Technically speaking, the Take method takes an IEnumerable<> of any type and returns an IEnumerable<> of the same type. The information of the original container type is lost in the process.
Now obviously, as in our sweets example, if you want to have tiny bags of two sweets each from your big bag, there is no one stopping you from repackaging them. Same here. If you need a sorted list, create a new sorted list from the result. But that's manual.
You can use SortedList constructor
var sortedList = new SortedList<int, int>(list.Take(2).ToDictionary(x => x.Key, x => x.Value));
given that this is the original type
Yes, but Take() is an extension method on IEnumerable<T>, and SortedList<TKey, TValue> implements IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue>>.
So the type you get back from Take() doesn't have to have any relation to the source you call it on - it merely returns an implementation of IEnumerable<T> where T is the same type as T of the IEnumerable<T> you call it on.
Instead instantiate a new list using the partition and its appropriate constructor:
var shortlist = new SortedList<int, int>(list.Take(2).ToDictionary(kvp => kvp.Key, kvp => kvp.Value));
Take doesn't return a SortedList so you need to create a new one one way or another:
var shortList = new SortedList<int, int>();
foreach (var x in list.Take(2))
shortList.Add(x.Key, x.Value);
I have a dictionary:
Dictionary<String, List<Foo>> test = new Dictionary<String, List<Foo>>();
I then populate this dictionary hence why I need the list so I can call Add(). My problem is the function needs to return:
Dictionary<String, IEnumerable<Foo>>
Is there any easy way to do this without doing the obvious and looping through my original dictionary and doing it manually?
return dictionary.ToDictionary(x => x.Key,x => x.Value.AsEnumerable())
It's more efficient and easier to use the List<Foo> to add things but add it to a Dictionary<String, IEnumerable<Foo>>. That's no problem since List<Foo> implements IEnumerable<Foo>, it's not even necessary to cast.
So something like this(pseudo code):
var test = new Dictionary<String, IEnumerable<Foo>>();
foreach(var x in something)
{
var list = new List<Foo>();
foreach(var y in x.SomeCollection)
list.Add(y.SomeProperty);
test.Add(x.KeyProperty, list); // works since List<T> is also an IEnumerable<T>
}
I tried this route as well, converting Dictionary<string, List<Foo>> to a ReadOnlyDictionary<string, IEnumerable<Foo>>. While I was trying to convert to a read-only dictionary, the whole purpose of converting a List to IEnumerable is to make a read only collection. The problem with the OP's approach is:
Dictionary<string, List<string>> errors = new Dictionary<string, List<string>>();
errors["foo"] = new List<string>() { "You can't do this" };
Dictionary<string, IEnumerable<string>> readOnlyErrors = // convert errors...
readOnlyErrors["foo"] = new List<string>() { "I'm not actually read-only!" };
The appearance of IEnumerable<Foo> makes you think this is read only and safe, when in fact it is not. After reading the question LINQ Convert Dictionary to Lookup a Lookup object is more appropriate, because it allows you to:
Associate one key with multiple values
You cannot overwrite a key with a new value
// This results in a compiler error
lookUp["foo"] = new List<Foo>() { ... };
The "multiple values" are already defined as IEnumerable<T>
You can still use the same outer and inner loop algorithm to extract individual values:
ILookup<string, string> lookup = // Convert to lookup
foreach (IGrouping<string, string> grouping in lookup)
{
Console.WriteLine(grouping.Key + ":");
foreach (string item in grouping)
{
Console.WriteLine(" item: " + item);
}
}
Convert Dictionary<string, List<Foo>> to ILookup<string, Foo>
It's a quick two-liner:
Dictionary<string, List<Foo>> foos = // Create and populate 'foos'
ILookup<string, Foo> lookup = foos.SelectMany(item => item.Value, Tuple.Create)
.ToLookup(p => p.Item1.Key, p => p.Item2);
Now you can use the same two-step loop as you would have with a Dictionary<string, IEnumerable<Foo>>:
foreach (IGrouping<string, Foo> grouping in lookup)
{
string key = grouping.Key;
foreach (Foo foo in grouping)
{
// Do stuff with key and foo
}
}
Source: LINQ Convert Dictionary to Lookup
Converting to another Dictionary with an IEnumerable value is like trying to stuff a square peg into a round hole. The more appropriate, and safe way (from an object-oriented standpoint) is to convert your read/write Dictionary to a Lookup. This gives you the true intended safety of an object that is read-only (except for the Foo items, which might not be immutable).
I would go so far as to say that most times when a ReadOnlyDictionary is used, you could use ILookup and get the same functionality.
I have an IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,string>>, from which I would like, ideally, an anonymous object which has the keys as property names and the values as property values.
I've tried various selection expressions (none of which even compiled...) and an approach using ExpandoObject (see below), but without success. Is there a good way to do this? If possible, I'd like to avoid an extra explicit iteration over the collection (i.e. do it all with a LINQ statement of some sort).
This is what I've tried so far. I hope it also clarifies what I'm trying to do:
var kvps = getProps(); // returns IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,string>>
dynamic o = new ExpandoObject();
foreach (var kvp in kvps)
{
o.Add(kvp);
}
This is OK at compile time, but at runtime I get a YSOD stating 'System.Dynamic.ExpandoObject' does not contain a definition for 'Add' - I guess it works at compile time because o is dynamic, so the compiler can't know if a method .Add() has been added to it since it was instantiated. The odd thing is, that on the MSDN documenation page for ExpandoObject .Add() is listed as one of several "explicitly implemented interface methods".
It is not necessary for me to get this into a dynamic object - I just need to get something that has property names and values according to the keys and values of the key-value pairs.
Update: Well, this is embarrassing. Turns out this was something of an XY-problem too.
I'm trying to render this to JSON using the built-in features of ASP.NET MVC, by simply returning Json(data) in my controller. The answers all worked very well to do what I first asked, but when I pass this object as data I still don't get what I want:
// What I get:
[
{ Key: 'firstkey', Value: 'FirstValue' },
{ Key: 'secondKey', Value: 'secondValue' }
]
// What I want:
{ firstKey: 'FirstValue', secondKey: 'secondValue' }
Apparently, an ExpandoObject with the relevant properties added didn't cut it - it was cast to a dictionary before rendering...
You need to use the ExpandoObject as an IDictionary<string, object> while populating it:
var kvps = getProps(); // returns IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string,string>>
IDictionary<string, object> o = new ExpandoObject();
foreach (var kvp in kvps)
{
// Or use Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value), if you want
o[kvp.Key] = kvp.Value;
}
dynamic d = o;
// Now you can use the properties
ExpandoObject explicitly implements IDictionary<string, object> - so you need to cast it to one first:
var kvps = getProps();
dynamic o = new ExpandoObject();
var dict = o as IDictionary<string, object>;
foreach (var kvp in kvps)
{
dict.Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
}
Now you can use o as you would expect:
var example = o.YourKey;
I'm trying to render this to JSON using the built-in features of ASP.NET MVC, by simply returning Json(data) in my controller.
Interesting.
To do that, you serialize a dictionary, not an ExpandoObject. MVC 3's JSON serializer already does that with a dictionary. All you have to do is convert your IEnumerable<KeyValuePair<string, object>> to a dictionary:
var kvps = getProps();
var dictionary = kvps.ToDictionary(k => k.Key, v => v.Value);
return Json(dictionary, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet); //take out allow get if you don't need it.
No dynamics required.
I think you have to cast your expando object to IDictionary and call Add(string, object)
I've seen a few different ways to iterate over a dictionary in C#. Is there a standard way?
foreach(KeyValuePair<string, string> entry in myDictionary)
{
// do something with entry.Value or entry.Key
}
If you are trying to use a generic Dictionary in C# like you would use an associative array in another language:
foreach(var item in myDictionary)
{
foo(item.Key);
bar(item.Value);
}
Or, if you only need to iterate over the collection of keys, use
foreach(var item in myDictionary.Keys)
{
foo(item);
}
And lastly, if you're only interested in the values:
foreach(var item in myDictionary.Values)
{
foo(item);
}
(Take note that the var keyword is an optional C# 3.0 and above feature, you could also use the exact type of your keys/values here)
In some cases you may need a counter that may be provided by for-loop implementation. For that, LINQ provides ElementAt which enables the following:
for (int index = 0; index < dictionary.Count; index++) {
var item = dictionary.ElementAt(index);
var itemKey = item.Key;
var itemValue = item.Value;
}
Depends on whether you're after the keys or the values...
From the MSDN Dictionary(TKey, TValue) Class description:
// When you use foreach to enumerate dictionary elements,
// the elements are retrieved as KeyValuePair objects.
Console.WriteLine();
foreach( KeyValuePair<string, string> kvp in openWith )
{
Console.WriteLine("Key = {0}, Value = {1}",
kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
}
// To get the values alone, use the Values property.
Dictionary<string, string>.ValueCollection valueColl =
openWith.Values;
// The elements of the ValueCollection are strongly typed
// with the type that was specified for dictionary values.
Console.WriteLine();
foreach( string s in valueColl )
{
Console.WriteLine("Value = {0}", s);
}
// To get the keys alone, use the Keys property.
Dictionary<string, string>.KeyCollection keyColl =
openWith.Keys;
// The elements of the KeyCollection are strongly typed
// with the type that was specified for dictionary keys.
Console.WriteLine();
foreach( string s in keyColl )
{
Console.WriteLine("Key = {0}", s);
}
Generally, asking for "the best way" without a specific context is like asking
what is the best color?
One the one hand, there are many colors and there's no best color. It depends on the need and often on taste, too.
On the other hand, there are many ways to iterate over a Dictionary in C# and there's no best way. It depends on the need and often on taste, too.
Most straightforward way
foreach (var kvp in items)
{
// key is kvp.Key
doStuff(kvp.Value)
}
If you need only the value (allows to call it item, more readable than kvp.Value).
foreach (var item in items.Values)
{
doStuff(item)
}
If you need a specific sort order
Generally, beginners are surprised about order of enumeration of a Dictionary.
LINQ provides a concise syntax that allows to specify order (and many other things), e.g.:
foreach (var kvp in items.OrderBy(kvp => kvp.Key))
{
// key is kvp.Key
doStuff(kvp.Value)
}
Again you might only need the value. LINQ also provides a concise solution to:
iterate directly on the value (allows to call it item, more readable than kvp.Value)
but sorted by the keys
Here it is:
foreach (var item in items.OrderBy(kvp => kvp.Key).Select(kvp => kvp.Value))
{
doStuff(item)
}
There are many more real-world use case you can do from these examples.
If you don't need a specific order, just stick to the "most straightforward way" (see above)!
C# 7.0 introduced Deconstructors and if you are using .NET Core 2.0+ Application, the struct KeyValuePair<> already include a Deconstruct() for you. So you can do:
var dic = new Dictionary<int, string>() { { 1, "One" }, { 2, "Two" }, { 3, "Three" } };
foreach (var (key, value) in dic) {
Console.WriteLine($"Item [{key}] = {value}");
}
//Or
foreach (var (_, value) in dic) {
Console.WriteLine($"Item [NO_ID] = {value}");
}
//Or
foreach ((int key, string value) in dic) {
Console.WriteLine($"Item [{key}] = {value}");
}
I would say foreach is the standard way, though it obviously depends on what you're looking for
foreach(var kvp in my_dictionary) {
...
}
Is that what you're looking for?
You can also try this on big dictionaries for multithreaded processing.
dictionary
.AsParallel()
.ForAll(pair =>
{
// Process pair.Key and pair.Value here
});
I appreciate this question has already had a lot of responses but I wanted to throw in a little research.
Iterating over a dictionary can be rather slow when compared with iterating over something like an array. In my tests an iteration over an array took 0.015003 seconds whereas an iteration over a dictionary (with the same number of elements) took 0.0365073 seconds that's 2.4 times as long! Although I have seen much bigger differences. For comparison a List was somewhere in between at 0.00215043 seconds.
However, that is like comparing apples and oranges. My point is that iterating over dictionaries is slow.
Dictionaries are optimised for lookups, so with that in mind I've created two methods. One simply does a foreach, the other iterates the keys then looks up.
public static string Normal(Dictionary<string, string> dictionary)
{
string value;
int count = 0;
foreach (var kvp in dictionary)
{
value = kvp.Value;
count++;
}
return "Normal";
}
This one loads the keys and iterates over them instead (I did also try pulling the keys into a string[] but the difference was negligible.
public static string Keys(Dictionary<string, string> dictionary)
{
string value;
int count = 0;
foreach (var key in dictionary.Keys)
{
value = dictionary[key];
count++;
}
return "Keys";
}
With this example the normal foreach test took 0.0310062 and the keys version took 0.2205441. Loading all the keys and iterating over all the lookups is clearly a LOT slower!
For a final test I've performed my iteration ten times to see if there are any benefits to using the keys here (by this point I was just curious):
Here's the RunTest method if that helps you visualise what's going on.
private static string RunTest<T>(T dictionary, Func<T, string> function)
{
DateTime start = DateTime.Now;
string name = null;
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
name = function(dictionary);
}
DateTime end = DateTime.Now;
var duration = end.Subtract(start);
return string.Format("{0} took {1} seconds", name, duration.TotalSeconds);
}
Here the normal foreach run took 0.2820564 seconds (around ten times longer than a single iteration took - as you'd expect). The iteration over the keys took 2.2249449 seconds.
Edited To Add:
Reading some of the other answers made me question what would happen if I used Dictionary instead of Dictionary. In this example the array took 0.0120024 seconds, the list 0.0185037 seconds and the dictionary 0.0465093 seconds. It's reasonable to expect that the data type makes a difference on how much slower the dictionary is.
What are my Conclusions?
Avoid iterating over a dictionary if you can, they are substantially slower than iterating over an array with the same data in it.
If you do choose to iterate over a dictionary don't try to be too clever, although slower you could do a lot worse than using the standard foreach method.
As already pointed out on this answer, KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue> implements a Deconstruct method starting on .NET Core 2.0, .NET Standard 2.1 and .NET Framework 5.0 (preview).
With this, it's possible to iterate through a dictionary in a KeyValuePair agnostic way:
var dictionary = new Dictionary<int, string>();
// ...
foreach (var (key, value) in dictionary)
{
// ...
}
There are plenty of options. My personal favorite is by KeyValuePair
Dictionary<string, object> myDictionary = new Dictionary<string, object>();
// Populate your dictionary here
foreach (KeyValuePair<string,object> kvp in myDictionary)
{
// Do some interesting things
}
You can also use the Keys and Values Collections
With .NET Framework 4.7 one can use decomposition
var fruits = new Dictionary<string, int>();
...
foreach (var (fruit, number) in fruits)
{
Console.WriteLine(fruit + ": " + number);
}
To make this code work on lower C# versions, add System.ValueTuple NuGet package and write somewhere
public static class MyExtensions
{
public static void Deconstruct<T1, T2>(this KeyValuePair<T1, T2> tuple,
out T1 key, out T2 value)
{
key = tuple.Key;
value = tuple.Value;
}
}
As of C# 7, you can deconstruct objects into variables. I believe this to be the best way to iterate over a dictionary.
Example:
Create an extension method on KeyValuePair<TKey, TVal> that deconstructs it:
public static void Deconstruct<TKey, TVal>(this KeyValuePair<TKey, TVal> pair, out TKey key, out TVal value)
{
key = pair.Key;
value = pair.Value;
}
Iterate over any Dictionary<TKey, TVal> in the following manner
// Dictionary can be of any types, just using 'int' and 'string' as examples.
Dictionary<int, string> dict = new Dictionary<int, string>();
// Deconstructor gets called here.
foreach (var (key, value) in dict)
{
Console.WriteLine($"{key} : {value}");
}
foreach is fastest and if you only iterate over ___.Values, it is also faster
Using C# 7, add this extension method to any project of your solution:
public static class IDictionaryExtensions
{
public static IEnumerable<(TKey, TValue)> Tuples<TKey, TValue>(
this IDictionary<TKey, TValue> dict)
{
foreach (KeyValuePair<TKey, TValue> kvp in dict)
yield return (kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
}
}
And use this simple syntax
foreach (var(id, value) in dict.Tuples())
{
// your code using 'id' and 'value'
}
Or this one, if you prefer
foreach ((string id, object value) in dict.Tuples())
{
// your code using 'id' and 'value'
}
In place of the traditional
foreach (KeyValuePair<string, object> kvp in dict)
{
string id = kvp.Key;
object value = kvp.Value;
// your code using 'id' and 'value'
}
The extension method transforms the KeyValuePair of your IDictionary<TKey, TValue> into a strongly typed tuple, allowing you to use this new comfortable syntax.
It converts -just- the required dictionary entries to tuples, so it does NOT converts the whole dictionary to tuples, so there are no performance concerns related to that.
There is a only minor cost calling the extension method for creating a tuple in comparison with using the KeyValuePair directly, which should NOT be an issue if you are assigning the KeyValuePair's properties Key and Value to new loop variables anyway.
In practice, this new syntax suits very well for most cases, except for low-level ultra-high performance scenarios, where you still have the option to simply not use it on that specific spot.
Check this out: MSDN Blog - New features in C# 7
Simplest form to iterate a dictionary:
foreach(var item in myDictionary)
{
Console.WriteLine(item.Key);
Console.WriteLine(item.Value);
}
I found this method in the documentation for the DictionaryBase class on MSDN:
foreach (DictionaryEntry de in myDictionary)
{
//Do some stuff with de.Value or de.Key
}
This was the only one I was able to get functioning correctly in a class that inherited from the DictionaryBase.
Sometimes if you only needs the values to be enumerated, use the dictionary's value collection:
foreach(var value in dictionary.Values)
{
// do something with entry.Value only
}
Reported by this post which states it is the fastest method:
http://alexpinsker.blogspot.hk/2010/02/c-fastest-way-to-iterate-over.html
I know this is a very old question, but I created some extension methods that might be useful:
public static void ForEach<T, U>(this Dictionary<T, U> d, Action<KeyValuePair<T, U>> a)
{
foreach (KeyValuePair<T, U> p in d) { a(p); }
}
public static void ForEach<T, U>(this Dictionary<T, U>.KeyCollection k, Action<T> a)
{
foreach (T t in k) { a(t); }
}
public static void ForEach<T, U>(this Dictionary<T, U>.ValueCollection v, Action<U> a)
{
foreach (U u in v) { a(u); }
}
This way I can write code like this:
myDictionary.ForEach(pair => Console.Write($"key: {pair.Key}, value: {pair.Value}"));
myDictionary.Keys.ForEach(key => Console.Write(key););
myDictionary.Values.ForEach(value => Console.Write(value););
If you want to use a for loop, you can do as below:
var keyList=new List<string>(dictionary.Keys);
for (int i = 0; i < keyList.Count; i++)
{
var key= keyList[i];
var value = dictionary[key];
}
I will take the advantage of .NET 4.0+ and provide an updated answer to the originally accepted one:
foreach(var entry in MyDic)
{
// do something with entry.Value or entry.Key
}
If say, you want to iterate over the values collection by default, I believe you can implement IEnumerable<>, Where T is the type of the values object in the dictionary, and "this" is a Dictionary.
public new IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator()
{
return this.Values.GetEnumerator();
}
The standard way to iterate over a Dictionary, according to official documentation on MSDN is:
foreach (DictionaryEntry entry in myDictionary)
{
//Read entry.Key and entry.Value here
}
I wrote an extension to loop over a dictionary.
public static class DictionaryExtension
{
public static void ForEach<T1, T2>(this Dictionary<T1, T2> dictionary, Action<T1, T2> action) {
foreach(KeyValuePair<T1, T2> keyValue in dictionary) {
action(keyValue.Key, keyValue.Value);
}
}
}
Then you can call
myDictionary.ForEach((x,y) => Console.WriteLine(x + " - " + y));
Dictionary< TKey, TValue > It is a generic collection class in c# and it stores the data in the key value format.Key must be unique and it can not be null whereas value can be duplicate and null.As each item in the dictionary is treated as KeyValuePair< TKey, TValue > structure representing a key and its value. and hence we should take the element type KeyValuePair< TKey, TValue> during the iteration of element.Below is the example.
Dictionary<int, string> dict = new Dictionary<int, string>();
dict.Add(1,"One");
dict.Add(2,"Two");
dict.Add(3,"Three");
foreach (KeyValuePair<int, string> item in dict)
{
Console.WriteLine("Key: {0}, Value: {1}", item.Key, item.Value);
}
The best answer is of course: Think, if you could use a more appropriate data structure than a dictionary if you plan to iterate over it- as Vikas Gupta mentioned already in the (beginning of the) discussion under the question. But that discussion as this whole thread still lacks surprisingly good alternatives. One is:
SortedList<string, string> x = new SortedList<string, string>();
x.Add("key1", "value1");
x.Add("key2", "value2");
x["key3"] = "value3";
foreach( KeyValuePair<string, string> kvPair in x )
Console.WriteLine($"{kvPair.Key}, {kvPair.Value}");
Why it could be argued a code smell of iterating over a dictionary (e.g. by foreach(KeyValuePair<,>) ?
A basic principle of Clean Coding:
"Express intent!"
Robert C. Martin writes in "Clean Code": "Choosing names that reveal intent". Obviously naming alone is too weak. "Express (reveal) intent with every coding decision" expresses it better.
A related principle is "Principle of least surprise" (=Principle of Least Astonishment).
Why this is related to iterating over a dictionary? Choosing a dictionary expresses the intent of choosing a data structure which was made for primarily finding data by key. Nowadays there are so much alternatives in .NET, if you want to iterate through key/value pairs that you could choose something else.
Moreover: If you iterate over something, you have to reveal something about how the items are (to be) ordered and expected to be ordered!
Although the known implementations of Dictionary sort the key collection in the order of the items added-
AFAIK, Dictionary has no assured specification about ordering (has it?).
But what are the alternatives?
TLDR:
SortedList: If your collection is not getting too large, a simple solution would be to use SortedList<,> which gives you also full indexing of key/value pairs.
Microsoft has a long article about mentioning and explaining fitting collections:
Keyed collection
To mention the most important: KeyedCollection<,> and SortedDictionary<,> .
SortedDictionary<,> is a bit faster than SortedList for only inserting if it gets large, but lacks indexing and is needed only if O(log n) for inserting is preferenced over other operations. If you really need O(1) for inserting and accept slower iterating in exchange, you have to stay with simple Dictionary<,>.
Obviously there is no data structure which is the fastest for every possible operation..
Additionally there is ImmutableSortedDictionary<,>.
And if one data structure is not exactly what you need, then derivate from Dictionary<,> or even from the new ConcurrentDictionary<,> and add explicit iteration/sorting functions!
var dictionary = new Dictionary<string, int>
{
{ "Key", 12 }
};
var aggregateObjectCollection = dictionary.Select(
entry => new AggregateObject(entry.Key, entry.Value));
Just wanted to add my 2 cent, as the most answers relate to foreach-loop.
Please, take a look at the following code:
Dictionary<String, Double> myProductPrices = new Dictionary<String, Double>();
//Add some entries to the dictionary
myProductPrices.ToList().ForEach(kvP =>
{
kvP.Value *= 1.15;
Console.Writeline(String.Format("Product '{0}' has a new price: {1} $", kvp.Key, kvP.Value));
});
Altought this adds a additional call of '.ToList()', there might be a slight performance-improvement (as pointed out here foreach vs someList.Foreach(){}),
espacially when working with large Dictionaries and running in parallel is no option / won't have an effect at all.
Also, please note that you wont be able to assign values to the 'Value' property inside a foreach-loop. On the other hand, you will be able to manipulate the 'Key' as well, possibly getting you into trouble at runtime.
When you just want to "read" Keys and Values, you might also use IEnumerable.Select().
var newProductPrices = myProductPrices.Select(kvp => new { Name = kvp.Key, Price = kvp.Value * 1.15 } );
in addition to the highest ranking posts where there is a discussion between using
foreach(KeyValuePair<string, string> entry in myDictionary)
{
// do something with entry.Value or entry.Key
}
or
foreach(var entry in myDictionary)
{
// do something with entry.Value or entry.Key
}
most complete is the following because you can see the dictionary type from the initialization, kvp is KeyValuePair
var myDictionary = new Dictionary<string, string>(x);//fill dictionary with x
foreach(var kvp in myDictionary)//iterate over dictionary
{
// do something with kvp.Value or kvp.Key
}