I am trying to use Lambda Expressions in a project to map to a third party query API. So, I'm parsing the Expression tree by hand.
If I pass in a lambda expression like:
p => p.Title == "title"
everything works.
However, if my lambda expression looks like:
p => p.Title == myaspdropdown.SelectedValue
Using the .NET debugger, I don't see the actual value of that funciton. Instead I see something like:
p => p.Title = (value(ASP.usercontrols_myaspusercontrol_ascx).myaspdropdown.SelectedValue)
What gives? And when I try to grab the right side of the expression as a string, I get (value(ASP.usercontrols_myaspusercontrol_ascx).myaspdropdown.SelectedValue) instead of the actual value. How do I get the actual value?
Remember that when you're dealing with the lambda expression as an expression tree, you don't have executable code. Rather you have a tree of expression elements, that make up the expression you wrote.
Charlie Calvert has a good post that discusses this in detail. Included is an example of using an expression visualiser for debugging expressions.
In your case, to get the value of the righthand side of the equality expression, you'll need to create a new lambda expression, compile it and then invoke it.
I've hacked together a quick example of this - hope it delivers what you need.
public class Class1
{
public string Selection { get; set; }
public void Sample()
{
Selection = "Example";
Example<Book, bool>(p => p.Title == Selection);
}
public void Example<T,TResult>(Expression<Func<T,TResult>> exp)
{
BinaryExpression equality = (BinaryExpression)exp.Body;
Debug.Assert(equality.NodeType == ExpressionType.Equal);
// Note that you need to know the type of the rhs of the equality
var accessorExpression = Expression.Lambda<Func<string>>(equality.Right);
Func<string> accessor = accessorExpression.Compile();
var value = accessor();
Debug.Assert(value == Selection);
}
}
public class Book
{
public string Title { get; set; }
}
To get the actual value, you need to apply the logic of the expression tree to whatever context you've got.
The whole point of expression trees is that they represent the logic as data rather than evaluating the expression. You'll need to work out what the lambda expression truly means. That may mean evaluating some parts of it against local data - you'll need to decide that for yourself. Expression trees are very powerful, but it's not a simple matter to parse and use them. (Ask anyone who's written a LINQ provider... Frans Bouma has bemoaned the difficulties several times.)
Just been struggling with exactly the same issue, thanks Bevan. On an extension, the following is a generic pattern you can use to extract the value (using this in my query engine).
[TestFixture]
public class TestClass
{
[Test]
public void TEst()
{
var user = new User {Id = 123};
var idToSearch = user.Id;
var query = Creator.CreateQuery<User>()
.Where(x => x.Id == idToSearch);
}
}
public class Query<T>
{
public Query<T> Where(Expression<Func<T, object>> filter)
{
var rightValue = GenericHelper.GetVariableValue(((BinaryExpression)((UnaryExpression)filter.Body).Operand).Right.Type, ((BinaryExpression)((UnaryExpression)filter.Body).Operand).Right);
Console.WriteLine(rightValue);
return this;
}
}
internal class GenericHelper
{
internal static object GetVariableValue(Type variableType, Expression expression)
{
var targetMethodInfo = typeof(InvokeGeneric).GetMethod("GetVariableValue");
var genericTargetCall = targetMethodInfo.MakeGenericMethod(variableType);
return genericTargetCall.Invoke(new InvokeGeneric(), new[] { expression });
}
}
internal class InvokeGeneric
{
public T GetVariableValue<T>(Expression expression) where T : class
{
var accessorExpression = Expression.Lambda<Func<T>>(expression);
var accessor = accessorExpression.Compile();
return accessor();
}
}
I'm not sure I understand. Where are you "seeing" that? Is that at design-time or run-time? Lambda expressions can be thought of essentially as anonymous delegates, and will operate with deferred execution. So you shouldn't expect to see the value assigned until after execution has passed that line, obviously.
I don't think that's really what you mean though... if you clarify the question a bit maybe I can help :)
Related
This seems simple, but I can't decipher the LINQ required to do it. I also can't add any new dependencies.
Basically, I'm trying to make this code generic:
if (filter.matchMode.ToUpper().Equals("EQ")) {
query = query.Where(x => x.SomeField.Equals(filter.Value));
if (filter.matchMode.ToUpper().Equals("LT")) {
query = query.Where(x => x.SomeField < filter.Value);
} else [... 5 other match modes ...]
}
Now, SomeField is only one of about 5 fields that needs this functionality. And there's 5 matching operators. I could just copy/pasta the whole thing, and then deal with the debt of having to change tons of code every time a new operator or field enters the mix, but that really doesn't seem right.
Basically, I need some way of defining SomeField at runtime, so I can factor out the whole if/else tree and use it for each supported field.
I've tried going down this road, but I think I'm misunderstanding something fundamental about expressions:
var entityType = typeof(TableObject);
ParameterExpression arg = Expression.Parameter(entityType, "x");
MemberExpression amproperty = Expression.Property(arg, "SomeField");
MemberExpression property = Expression.Property(amproperty, "Equals"); // ???
// what's next, if this is even the right direction...
EDIT: a shorter version of the question might be: how can I construct the following object foo using MemberExpressions and lambdas, such that SomeField can be passed in as a string "SomeField":
Expression<Func<TableObject, bool>> foo = x => x.SomeField.Equals("FOO");
UPDATE: here's what I ended up coming up with:
private IQueryable<TableObject> processFilter(
IQueryable<TableObject> query,
FilterItem filter,
string fieldName)
{
var entityType = typeof(TableObject);
// construct the argument and access object
var propertyInfo = entityType.GetProperty(fieldName);
ParameterExpression arg = Expression.Parameter(entityType, "x");
MemberExpression access = Expression.MakeMemberAccess(arg,
typeof(TableObject).GetProperty(fieldName)
);
// translate the operation into the appropriate Expression method
Expression oprFunc;
if (filter.MatchMode.ToUpper().Equals("EQ")) {
oprfunc =
Expression.Equal(access, Expression.Constant(filter.Value));
} else if (filter.MatchMode.ToUpper().Equals("LT")) {
oprfunc =
Expression.LessThan(access, Expression.Constant(filter.IntValue));
} else {
throw new ArgumentException(
$"invalid argument: ${filter.MatchMode}"
);
}
// construct the lambda
var func = Expression.Lambda<Func<TableObject, bool>>(oprFunc, arg);
// return the new query
return query.Where(func);
}
So far, this seems to cover most of the cases. It starts to go off the rails with nullable fields and date comparisons, but it will work for what I need it to do. The part I'm still not completely sure about is Expression.MakeMemberAccess. I've seen this written many ways and I'm not sure if that's the correct way to create that expression.
Let's say you have class like this:
class SomeClass
{
public string a1 { get; set; }
public string b1 { get; set; }
public string c1 { get; set; }
}
also let's assume you have method like this:
public List<T> GetAll(Expression<Func<T, bool>> criteria )
{
return someDataLINQCapable.Where(criteria);
}
Method could be called like this:
GetAll<SomeClass>(m => m.a1 != null && m.b1=="SomethingUseful")
Here's my scenario:
There is a collection of objects where each object contains a Dictionary<string, string>. The user can build a set of queries for this collection from another app to obtain a subset by selecting a Key in the Dictionary, an operator such as > or CONTAINS, etc., and a Value. They can also balance parenthesis to create groups of queries and select AND/OR operators to combine the queries.
As an example, let's say I have a collection of Car objects and the Dictionary contains keys for Make, Model, and Year.
My app is getting these queries in the form of a string like so:
"((Make = Honda) AND (Model CONTAINS Civic)) || (Year >= 2015)"
This tells me that from the collection of Car objects that I want cars that have Dictionary keys/values of <Make, Honda> and <Model, anything that contains "Civic"> OR <Year, greater than or equal to 2015>
So, I parse these out and put them into a QueryClass containing three string fields for the Key, the Operator, and the Value. I also keep track of the operator between the queries, and if they are in a group of parentheses or not.
Currently, I have to go through each QueryClass one by one performing the query, checking what the previous operator was, if it's part of a group, etc. and combining collections over and over until it reaches the end. This is tedious and seems like an awful way to do things. If there was a way to build these LINQ queries dynamically or perform SQL statements (what these are essential) on this collection it would be better.
Here's my query class that I'm storing the parsed strings in:
class QueryClass
{
public string FieldName { get; set; }
public string Operator { get; set; }
public object Value { get; set; }
public QueryClass(string pInput)
{
var returned = RegexHelpers.SplitKeyValue(pInput); //just returns a string like "Make = Honda" into three parts
if (returned != null)
{
FieldName = returned.Item1;
Operator = returned.Item2;
Value = returned.Item3;
}
}
}
My parsing class is pretty long so I won't post the whole thing but it returns a List<object> where each element is either:
A QueryClass
"AND" or "OR"
Another List which means it's a group of queries that were grouped by parentheses, containing the two choices above.
Here's an example of the List<object> I get after parsing a string:
I then just loop through each element, determine if the value is a double or string, and execute a LINQ statement on my collection. I'm checking if the operator was "AND" or "OR" (or none if it's just one query), if it's part of a group or not, and combining the results appropriately.
Here is my implementation of converting your query into a Func. Since I wasn't sure what type was in your collection, I made an interface to represent objects that had an attributes Dictionary<string, string> and processed that.
Basically I added a method to QueryClass to convert it to an Expression. It uses a helper dictionary string->lambda that builds the appropriate comparison Expression for each operator.
Then I added a class to convert the List<object> into a Func<IItem,bool> suitable for a LINQ Where filter.
public interface IItem {
Dictionary<string, string> attributes { get; set; }
}
class QueryClass {
public string FieldName { get; set; }
public string Operator { get; set; }
public object Value { get; set; }
public QueryClass(string pInput) {
var returned = RegexHelpers.SplitKeyValue(pInput); //just returns a string like "Make = Honda" into three parts
if (returned != null) {
FieldName = returned.Item1;
Operator = returned.Item2;
Value = returned.Item3;
}
}
static MethodInfo getItemMI = typeof(Dictionary<string, string>).GetMethod("get_Item");
static Dictionary<string, Func<Expression, Expression, Expression>> opTypes = new Dictionary<string, Func<Expression, Expression, Expression>> {
{ "==", (Expression lhs, Expression rhs) => Expression.MakeBinary(ExpressionType.Equal, lhs, rhs) },
{ ">=", (Expression lhs, Expression rhs) => Expression.MakeBinary(ExpressionType.GreaterThanOrEqual, Expression.Call(lhs, typeof(String).GetMethod("CompareTo", new[] { typeof(string) }), rhs), Expression.Constant(0)) },
{ "CONTAINS", (Expression lhs, Expression rhs) => Expression.Call(lhs, typeof(String).GetMethod("Contains"), rhs) }
};
static MemberInfo attribMI = typeof(IItem).GetMember("attributes")[0];
public Expression AsExpression(ParameterExpression p) {
var dictField = Expression.MakeMemberAccess(p, attribMI);
var lhs = Expression.Call(dictField, getItemMI, Expression.Constant(FieldName));
var rhs = Expression.Constant(Value);
if (opTypes.TryGetValue(Operator, out var exprMakerFn))
return exprMakerFn(lhs, rhs);
else
throw new InvalidExpressionException($"Unrecognized operator {Operator}");
}
}
public class LinqBuilder {
static Type TItems = typeof(IItem);
static Expression BuildOneLINQ(object term, ParameterExpression parm) {
switch (term) {
case QueryClass qc: // d => d[qc.FieldName] qc.Operator qc.Value
return qc.AsExpression(parm);
case List<object> subQuery:
return BuildLINQ(subQuery, parm);
default:
throw new Exception();
}
}
static Expression BuildLINQ(List<object> query, ParameterExpression parm) {
Expression body = null;
for (int queryIndex = 0; queryIndex < query.Count; ++queryIndex) {
var term = query[queryIndex];
switch (term) {
case string op:
var rhs = BuildOneLINQ(query[++queryIndex], parm);
var eop = (op == "AND") ? ExpressionType.AndAlso : ExpressionType.OrElse;
body = Expression.MakeBinary(eop, body, rhs);
break;
default:
body = BuildOneLINQ(term, parm);
break;
}
}
return body;
}
public static Func<IItem, bool> BuildLINQ(List<object> query) {
var parm = Expression.Parameter(TItems, "i");
return Expression.Lambda<Func<IItem, bool>>(BuildLINQ(query, parm), parm).Compile();
}
}
Once you have this, you can pass in a List<object> expression and then filter your collection. Given a query q and a collection of IItems cs, you can do:
var ans = cs.Where(LinqBuilder.BuildLINQ(q));
I would approach this problem little differently, since what you are already having is List<object>, which internally contain a QueryClass containing all the relevant fields containing information, FieldName,Operator and Value, where you are aware which of the binary expressions have to be bundled in a parentheses. Important point is how can you create a Run-time Expression to take care of all kinds of scenarios.
Following is a sample to mimic your scenario:
Sample Class
public class Car
{
public string Make {get; set;}
public string Model {get; set;}
public int Year {get; set;}
}
Query
((c.Make.Equals("Honda") AndAlso c.Model.Contains("Civic")) Or (c.Year >= 2015))
Linqpad Code
void Main()
{
var cars = new List<Car>();
Expression<Func<Car,bool>> e1 = c => c.Make.Equals("Honda");
Expression<Func<Car,bool>> e2 = c => c.Model.Contains("Civic");
Expression<Func<Car,bool>> e3 = c => c.Year >= 2015;
var expr1 = Expression.AndAlso(e1.Body,e2.Body);
var expr2 = e3;
var finalExpression = Expression.Or(expr1,expr2.Body);
finalExpression.Dump();
}
Purpose
As it can be seen that I have manually constructed the Expressions and finally Dump the final expression, since in Linqpad it provides a graphical representation of how shall the Expression be constructed dynamically, overall image is too big and deep to be pasted here (you may try yourself using LinqPad), but following are the relevant details:
Create a ParameterExpression, this acts as a lambda parameter representing the Car class object (this is independent of the fields of the Query class)
var parameterExpression = Expression.Parameter(typeof(Car),"c");
Create MemberExpression to access each relevant field of the Car class, which is used in the Query (this one needs Field property of the Query class)
var makeMemberAccessExpression = Expression.MakeMemberAccess(parameterExpression, typeof(Car).GetProperty("Make"));
var modelMemberAccessExpression = Expression.MakeMemberAccess(parameterExpression, typeof(Car).GetProperty("Model"));
var yearMemberAccessExpression = Expression.MakeMemberAccess(parameterExpression, typeof(Car).GetProperty("Year"));
Completing the Expression:
a.) c => c.Make.Equals("Honda") we create as follows: (this one needs Value property of the QueryClass)
var makeConstantExpression = Expression.Constant("Honda");
var makeEqualExpression = Expression.Equal(makeMemberAccessExpression, makeConstantExpression);
b.) c.Model.Contains("Civic") can be represented as follows here we need supply the MethodInfo for the string Contains method and create a MethodCallEXpression
var modelConstantExpression = Expression.Constant("Civic");
var stringContainsMethodInfo = typeof(string).GetMethod("Contains", new[] { typeof(string) });
var modelContainsMethodExpression = Expression.Call(modelMemberAccessExpression, stringContainsMethodInfo, modelConstantExpression);
c.) c.Year >= 2015 can simply projected as:
var yearConstantExpression = Expression.Constant(2015);
var yearGreaterThanEqualExpression = Expression.GreaterThanOrEqual(yearMemberAccessExpression, yearConstantExpression);
Combining all together to form the Composite Expression:
Expressions a.) and b.) are combined together as follows:
((c.Make.Equals("Honda") AndAlso c.Model.Contains("Civic"))
var firstExpression = Expression.AndAlso(makeEqualExpression,modelContainsMethodExpression);
Expression c.) is independent:
c.Year >= 2015
var secondExpression = yearGreaterThanEqualExpression;
Final Combined Expression and Creation a Func Delegate
// Expressions combined via Or (||)
var finalCombinedExpression = Expression.Or(firstExpression,secondExpression);
// Create Lambda Expression
var lambda = Expression.Lambda<Func<Car,bool>>(finalCombinedExpression, parameterExpression);
// Create Func delegate via Compilation
var func = lambda.Compile();
func delegate thus can be used in any of the where clause in the Linq, which expects Func<Car,bool>
Design Suggestions
Using the explanation above and values from the Query Class placeholders or directly from the Dictionary it is feasible to create any number of Expressions to be used dynamically in the code, to be compiled and used as a Func delegate
Binary expressions like Equal, GreaterThan, LessThan, LessThanOrEqual,GreaterThanOrEqual are all exposed by the Expression trees to be used directly, For method like Contains available by default you need Reflection to get theb MethodInfo, similarly it can be done for the Static methods, just that there's object expressions
All Expressions expect values to be supplied Left to Right in the correct order, it cannot be random or incorrect order, else it will fail at run-time.
In your case, since you have few queries combined in parentheses and few independent, I would recommend creating multiple List<Expression>, where each List is combined in parentheses using AndAlso or OrElse and each list can thus be combined using And / Or
By this approach you shall be able to construct very complex requirements at runtime using Linq Expressions.
You should be able to use Linq Expressions (System.Linq.Expressions) and leverage predicates to handle your filtering.
public IQueryable<Car> GetCars(Expression<Func<Car, bool>> filter)
{
return context.Cars.Where(filter);
}
That said, the challenge will be to build your predicate expressions based off of your custom QueryClass object. To handle the filter on each Dictionary you can create a method to handle each:
public Expression<Func<Car, bool>> GetModelFilter(QueryClass modelQuery)
{
return modelQuery.Operator == "CONTAINS"? car => car.Model.Contains(modelQuery.Value) : car => car.Model == modelQuery.Value;
}
Considering you have a limited amount of filters, the above may be acceptable. However, when dealing with a large set this can also be done more dynamically, using reflection or a dynamic predicate builder but for simplicity you can follow the above.
HTH
I want to use LinqKit's PredicateBuilder and pass the predicate into .Any method for related model.
So I want to build a predicate:
var castCondition = PredicateBuilder.New<CastInfo>(true);
if (movies != null && movies.Length > 0)
{
castCondition = castCondition.And(c => movies.Contains(c.MovieId));
}
if (roleType > 0)
{
castCondition = castCondition.And(c => c.RoleId == roleType);
}
And then use it to filter model that has relation to model in predicate:
IQueryable<Name> result = _context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(castCondition));
return await result.OrderBy(n => n.Name1).Take(25).ToListAsync();
But this causes a System.NotSupportedException: Could not parse expression 'n.CastInfo.Any(Convert(__castCondition_0, Func``2))': The given arguments did not match the expected arguments: Object of type 'System.Linq.Expressions.UnaryExpression' cannot be converted to type 'System.Linq.Expressions.LambdaExpression'.
I saw similar question and answer there suggests to use .Compile. Or one more question that build an extra predicate.
So I tried to use extra predicate
var tp = PredicateBuilder.New<Name>(true);
tp = tp.And(n => n.CastInfo.Any(castCondition.Compile()));
IQueryable<Name> result = _context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(tp);
Or use compile directly
IQueryable<Name> result = _context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(castCondition.Compile()));
But I have an error about Compile: System.NotSupportedException: Could not parse expression 'n.CastInfo.Any(__Compile_0)'
So is it possible to convert the result from PredicateBuilder to pass into Any?
Note: I was able to build the desired behavior combining expressions, but I don't like that I need extra variables.
System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<Func<CastInfo,bool>> castExpression = (c => true);
if (movies != null && movies.Length > 0)
{
castExpression = (c => movies.Contains(c.MovieId));
}
if (roleType > 0)
{
var existingExpression = castExpression;
castExpression = c => existingExpression.Invoke(c) && c.RoleId == roleType;
}
IQueryable<Name> result = _context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(castExpression.Compile()));
return await result.OrderBy(n => n.Name1).Take(25).ToListAsync();
So I assume I just miss something about builder.
Update about versions: I use dotnet core 2.0 and LinqKit.Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore 1.1.10
Looking at the code, one will assume that the type of castCondition variable is Expression<Func<CastInfo, bool>> (as it was in earlier versions of PredicateBuilder).
But if that was the case, then n.CastInfo.Any(castCondition) should not even compile (assuming CastInfo is a collection navigation property, so the compiler will hit Enumerable.Any which expects Func<CastInfo, bool>, not Expression<Func<CastInfo, bool>>). So what's going on here?
In my opinion, this is a good example of C# implicit operator abuse. The PredicateBuilder.New<T> method actually returns a class called ExpressionStarter<T>, which has many methods emulating Expression, but more importantly, has implicit conversion to Expression<Func<T, bool>> and Func<CastInfo, bool>. The later allows that class to be used for top level Enumerable / Queryable methods as replacement of the respective lambda func/expression. However, it also prevents the compile time error when used inside the expression tree as in your case - the complier emits something like n.CastInfo.Any((Func<CastInfo, bool>)castCondition) which of course causes exception at runtime.
The whole idea of LinqKit AsExpandable method is to allow "invoking" expressions via custom Invoke extension method, which then is "expanded" in the expression tree. So back at the beginning, if the variable type was Expression<Func<CastInfo, bool>>, the intended usage is:
_context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(c => castCondition.Invoke(c)));
But now this doesn't compile because of the reason explained earlier. So you have to convert it first to Expression<Func<T, bool> outside of the query:
Expression<Func<CastInfo, bool>> castPredicate = castCondition;
and then use
_context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(c => castPredicate.Invoke(c)));
or
_context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(castPredicate.Compile()));
To let compiler infer the expression type, I would create a custom extension method like this:
using System;
using System.Linq.Expressions;
namespace LinqKit
{
public static class Extensions
{
public static Expression<Func<T, bool>> ToExpression<T>(this ExpressionStarter<T> expr) => expr;
}
}
and then simply use
var castPredicate = castCondition.ToExpression();
It still has to be done outside of the query, i.e. the following does not work:
_context.Name.AsExpandable().Where(n => n.CastInfo.Any(c => castCondition.ToExpression().Invoke(c)));
It may not be exactly related to the original question, but considering the following model :
public Class Music
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public List<Genre> Genres { get; set; }
}
public Class Genre
{
public int Id { get; set; }
public string Title { get; set; }
}
List<string> genresToFind = new() {"Pop", "Rap", "Classical"};
If you are trying to find all Musics that their genres exist in genresToFind list, here's what you can do:
Create PredicateBuilder expressions chain on Genre model :
var pre = PredicateBuilder.New<Genre>();
foreach (var genre in genresToFind)
{
pre = pre.Or(g => g.Title.Contains(genre));
}
Then execute your query like this :
var result = await _db.Musics.AsExpandable()
.Where(m => m.Genres
.Any(g => pre.ToExpression().Invoke(g)))
.ToListAsync();
ToExpression() is a generic extension method that we've created to convert ExpressionStarter<Genre> type to Expression<Func<Genre, bool>> :
public static class ExpressionExtensions
{
public static Expression<Func<T, bool>> ToExpression<T> (this
ExpressionStarter<T> exp) => exp;
}
Also, you'll need LinqKit.Microsoft.EntityFrameworkCore package for efcore.
I have two expression trees defined like this:
private Expression<Func<TEntity, TPropertyResult>> PropertyAccessor { get; set; }
and
private Expression<Func<TPropertyResult, bool>> TestExpression { get; set; }
I need to create a new expression tree that will result in the equivalent of:
var expression = p => this.TestExpression(this.PropertyAccessor(p));
When using Expression.Invoke(this.TestExpression, this.PropertyAccessor), I get the following error
{"Expression of type
'System.Func`2[MyEntity,System.String]'
cannot be used for parameter of type
'System.String'"}
TPropertyResult is a string during my test.
I tried using Expression.Call or Expression.Invoke. No luck. What should I use?
I think this does what you are asking for:
Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>> Combined
{
get
{
var entity = Expression.Parameter(typeof(TEntity));
var pa = Expression.Invoke(PropertyAccessor, entity);
var te = Expression.Invoke(TestExpression, pa);
return (Expression<Func<TEntity, bool>>) Expression.Lambda(te, entity);
}
}
I tested this and it works as I would expect.
However, re-reading your original question (before my edits), I am beginning to get the impression that you asked the wrong question and that you probably don’t need expression trees. If all you need is functions, then you can use them without Expression:
private Func<TEntity, TPropertyResult> PropertyAccessor { get; set; }
private Func<TPropertyResult, bool> TestExpression { get; set; }
private Func<TEntity, bool> Combined
{
get
{
return entity => TestExpression(PropertyAccessor(entity));
}
}
Example of use:
// Set up the original functions
PropertyAccessor = entity => GenerateResult(entity);
TestExpression = result => result.IsCool();
// This stores a reference to the combined function
var fn = Combined;
// This actually evaluates the function
bool isCool = fn(myEntity);
// Alternatively, you could evaluate the function directly, without the variable
bool isCool = Combined(myEntity);
The easiest way I found to do this is by using LinqKit (https://github.com/scottksmith95/LINQKit)
With it you can actually do
var expression = p => this.TestExpression.Invoke(this.PropertyAccessor(p));
db.Users.Where(expression.Expand());
Expand comes with LinqKit and does the magic here, it allows EF to be able to do the translation to SQL despite having the Invoke in your expression.
This question already has answers here:
Possible pitfalls of using this (extension method based) shorthand
(11 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
How can I check for nulls in a deep lamda expression?
Say for example I have a class structure that was nested several layers deep, and I wanted to execute the following lambda:
x => x.Two.Three.Four.Foo
I want it to return null if Two, Three, or Four were null, rather than throwing a System.NullReferenceException.
public class Tests
{
// This test will succeed
[Fact]
public void ReturnsValueWhenClass2NotNull()
{
var one = new One();
one.Two = new Two();
one.Two.Three = new Three();
one.Two.Three.Four = new Four();
one.Two.Three.Four.Foo = "blah";
var result = GetValue(one, x => x.Two.Three.Four.Foo);
Assert.Equal("blah", result);
}
// This test will fail
[Fact]
public void ReturnsNullWhenClass2IsNull()
{
var one = new One();
var result = GetValue(one, x => x.Two.Three.Four.Foo);
Assert.Equal(null, result);
}
private TResult GetValue<TModel, TResult>(TModel model, Expression<Func<TModel, TResult>> expression)
{
var func = expression.Compile();
var value = func(model);
return value;
}
public class One
{
public Two Two { get; set; }
}
public class Two
{
public Three Three { get; set; }
}
public class Three
{
public Four Four { get; set; }
}
public class Four
{
public string Foo { get; set; }
public string Bar { get; set; }
}
}
UPDATE:
One solution would be to catch the NullReferenceException like this:
private TResult GetValue<TModel, TResult>(TModel model, Expression<Func<TModel, TResult>> expression)
{
TResult value;
try
{
var func = expression.Compile();
value = func(model);
}
catch (NullReferenceException)
{
value = default(TResult);
}
return value;
}
But I hate to incur the expense of catching an exception that is not, in my mind, exceptional. I expect this to be the case quite often in my domain.
UPDATE 2:
Another solution would be modify the property getters like this:
public class One
{
private Two two;
public Two Two
{
get
{
return two ?? new Two();
}
set
{
two = value;
}
}
}
Which is mostly ok for my domain, but there are times when I really to expect a property to return null. I checked the answer from Josh E as helpful since it comes pretty close to what I need in some cases.
You could do this with a generic helper extension method, something like:
public static class Get {
public static T IfNotNull<T, U>(this U item, Func<U, T> lambda) where U: class {
if (item == null) {
return default(T);
}
return lambda(item);
}
}
var one = new One();
string fooIfNotNull = one.IfNotNull(x => x.Two).IfNotNull(x => x.Three).IfNotNull(x => x.Four).IfNotNull(x => x.Foo);
You can't do that in a concise way. You can either make the lambda multiple lines, or use nested ternary operators:
var result = GetValue(one, x => x.Two == null ? null :
x.Two.Three == null ? null :
x.Two.Three.Four == null ? null :
x.Two.Three.Four.Foo;
Ugly, I know.
Doing this concisely requires an as-yet-unimplemented operator. We considered adding an operator ".?" to C# 4.0 which would have your desired semantics, but unfortunately it did not fit into our budget. We'll consider it for a hypothetical future version of the language.
You can now do using the Maybe project on codeplex.
Syntax is:
string result = One.Maybe(o => o.Two.Three.Four.Foo);
string cityName = Employee.Maybe(e => e.Person.Address.CityName);
I've written an extension method which enables you to do this:
blah.GetValueOrDefault(x => x.Two.Three.Four.Foo);
It uses Expression Trees to build a nested conditional checking for nulls at each node before returning the expression value; the created expression tree is compiled to a Func and cached, so subsequent uses of the same call should run at almost native speed.
You can also pass in a default value to return if you like:
blah.GetValueOrDefault(x => x.Two.Three.Four.Foo, Foo.Empty);
I've written a blog about it here.
I'm not skilled in c#, but maybe there's some way to implement the "andand" pattern from ruby that solves exactly this problem without polluting the implementation.
The concept is also known as the Maybe Monad in Haskell.
The title of this article seems promising.
Always initialize your properties before using them. Add a constructor to class One, Two, Three and Four. In the constructor initialize your properties so they are not null.
You could modify your getters to read something like:
private Two _two;
public Two Two
{
get
{
if (null == _two)
return new Two();
else
return _two;
}
}
I find the coalesce operator useful for this at times. This only helps though if there is a default/null equivalent version of the object you can drop in.
For instance, sometimes when I'm cracking open XML...
IEnumeratable<XElement> sample;
sample.Where(S => (S.Attribute["name"] ?? new XAttribute("name","")).Value.StartsWith("Hello"))...
Depending on how the default objects are retrieved this can be verbose, and the above example is not a great use but you get the idea. For the particular case of reading XML attributes I have an extension method that returns the attribute value or an empty string.
I converted a function that used a lot of if statements to avoid the nulls to the .IFNotNull method for classes that I converted from an XSD that are 4 and 5 levels deep.
Here are a few lines of the converted code:
ProdYear.PRIOR_CUMULATIVE_CARBON_DIOXIDE_VALUE = year.IfNotNull(x => x.PRIOR_CUMULATIVE).IfNotNull(y => y.CARBON_DIOXIDE).IfNotNull(z => z.VALUE).ToDouble();
ProdYear.PRIOR_CUMULATIVE_CARBON_DIOXIDE_UOM = year.IfNotNull(x => x.PRIOR_CUMULATIVE).IfNotNull(y => y.CARBON_DIOXIDE).IfNotNull(z => z.UOM);
Here are some interesting stats about it:
1) This new method took 3.7409 times longer to run that the variation with the If Statements.
2) I decreased my function line count from 157 to 59.
3) CodeRush from DevExpress has a "Maintenance Complexity" score. When I converted to the Lambda statements, it increased from 984 to 2076, which is theoretically much harder to maintain.