You can't query against the DataTable
's Rows collection, since DataRowCollection
doesn't implement IEnumerable<T>
. You need to use the AsEnumerable()
extension for DataTable
. Like so:
var results = from myRow in myDataTable.AsEnumerable()
where myRow.Field<int>("RowNo") == 1
select myRow;
And as @Keith says, you'll need to add a reference to System.Data.DataSetExtensions
AsEnumerable()
returns IEnumerable<DataRow>
. If you need to convert IEnumerable<DataRow>
to a DataTable
, use the CopyToDataTable()
extension.
Below is query with Lambda Expression,
var result = myDataTable
.AsEnumerable()
.Where(myRow => myRow.Field<int>("RowNo") == 1);
Just stumbled into this oldie...
To do this without the dynamic LINQ library, you just need the code as below. This covers most common scenarios including nested properties.
To get it working with IEnumerable<T>
you could add some wrapper methods that go via AsQueryable
- but the code below is the core Expression
logic needed.
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> OrderBy<T>(
this IQueryable<T> source,
string property)
{
return ApplyOrder<T>(source, property, "OrderBy");
}
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> OrderByDescending<T>(
this IQueryable<T> source,
string property)
{
return ApplyOrder<T>(source, property, "OrderByDescending");
}
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> ThenBy<T>(
this IOrderedQueryable<T> source,
string property)
{
return ApplyOrder<T>(source, property, "ThenBy");
}
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> ThenByDescending<T>(
this IOrderedQueryable<T> source,
string property)
{
return ApplyOrder<T>(source, property, "ThenByDescending");
}
static IOrderedQueryable<T> ApplyOrder<T>(
IQueryable<T> source,
string property,
string methodName)
{
string[] props = property.Split('.');
Type type = typeof(T);
ParameterExpression arg = Expression.Parameter(type, "x");
Expression expr = arg;
foreach(string prop in props) {
// use reflection (not ComponentModel) to mirror LINQ
PropertyInfo pi = type.GetProperty(prop);
expr = Expression.Property(expr, pi);
type = pi.PropertyType;
}
Type delegateType = typeof(Func<,>).MakeGenericType(typeof(T), type);
LambdaExpression lambda = Expression.Lambda(delegateType, expr, arg);
object result = typeof(Queryable).GetMethods().Single(
method => method.Name == methodName
&& method.IsGenericMethodDefinition
&& method.GetGenericArguments().Length == 2
&& method.GetParameters().Length == 2)
.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(T), type)
.Invoke(null, new object[] {source, lambda});
return (IOrderedQueryable<T>)result;
}
Edit: it gets more fun if you want to mix that with dynamic
- although note that dynamic
only applies to LINQ-to-Objects (expression-trees for ORMs etc can't really represent dynamic
queries - MemberExpression
doesn't support it). But here's a way to do it with LINQ-to-Objects. Note that the choice of Hashtable
is due to favorable locking semantics:
using Microsoft.CSharp.RuntimeBinder;
using System;
using System.Collections;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Dynamic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Runtime.CompilerServices;
static class Program
{
private static class AccessorCache
{
private static readonly Hashtable accessors = new Hashtable();
private static readonly Hashtable callSites = new Hashtable();
private static CallSite<Func<CallSite, object, object>> GetCallSiteLocked(
string name)
{
var callSite = (CallSite<Func<CallSite, object, object>>)callSites[name];
if(callSite == null)
{
callSites[name] = callSite = CallSite<Func<CallSite, object, object>>
.Create(Binder.GetMember(
CSharpBinderFlags.None,
name,
typeof(AccessorCache),
new CSharpArgumentInfo[] {
CSharpArgumentInfo.Create(
CSharpArgumentInfoFlags.None,
null)
}));
}
return callSite;
}
internal static Func<dynamic,object> GetAccessor(string name)
{
Func<dynamic, object> accessor = (Func<dynamic, object>)accessors[name];
if (accessor == null)
{
lock (accessors )
{
accessor = (Func<dynamic, object>)accessors[name];
if (accessor == null)
{
if(name.IndexOf('.') >= 0) {
string[] props = name.Split('.');
CallSite<Func<CallSite, object, object>>[] arr
= Array.ConvertAll(props, GetCallSiteLocked);
accessor = target =>
{
object val = (object)target;
for (int i = 0; i < arr.Length; i++)
{
var cs = arr[i];
val = cs.Target(cs, val);
}
return val;
};
} else {
var callSite = GetCallSiteLocked(name);
accessor = target =>
{
return callSite.Target(callSite, (object)target);
};
}
accessors[name] = accessor;
}
}
}
return accessor;
}
}
public static IOrderedEnumerable<dynamic> OrderBy(
this IEnumerable<dynamic> source,
string property)
{
return Enumerable.OrderBy<dynamic, object>(
source,
AccessorCache.GetAccessor(property),
Comparer<object>.Default);
}
public static IOrderedEnumerable<dynamic> OrderByDescending(
this IEnumerable<dynamic> source,
string property)
{
return Enumerable.OrderByDescending<dynamic, object>(
source,
AccessorCache.GetAccessor(property),
Comparer<object>.Default);
}
public static IOrderedEnumerable<dynamic> ThenBy(
this IOrderedEnumerable<dynamic> source,
string property)
{
return Enumerable.ThenBy<dynamic, object>(
source,
AccessorCache.GetAccessor(property),
Comparer<object>.Default);
}
public static IOrderedEnumerable<dynamic> ThenByDescending(
this IOrderedEnumerable<dynamic> source,
string property)
{
return Enumerable.ThenByDescending<dynamic, object>(
source,
AccessorCache.GetAccessor(property),
Comparer<object>.Default);
}
static void Main()
{
dynamic a = new ExpandoObject(),
b = new ExpandoObject(),
c = new ExpandoObject();
a.X = "abc";
b.X = "ghi";
c.X = "def";
dynamic[] data = new[] {
new { Y = a },
new { Y = b },
new { Y = c }
};
var ordered = data.OrderByDescending("Y.X").ToArray();
foreach (var obj in ordered)
{
Console.WriteLine(obj.Y.X);
}
}
}
Best Answer
That depends on your code. Most of the time, using LINQ does cause a small performance hit. In some cases, this hit can be significant for you, but you should avoid LINQ only when you know that it is too slow for you (i.e. if profiling your code showed that LINQ is reason why your code is slow).
But you're right that using
ToList()
too often can cause significant performance problems. You should callToList()
only when you have to. Be aware that there are also cases where addingToList()
can improve performance a lot (e.g. when the collection is loaded from database every time it's iterated).Regarding the number of iterations: it depends on what exactly do you mean by “iterates twice”. If you count the number of times
MoveNext()
is called on some collection, then yes, usingWhere()
this way leads to iterating twice. The sequence of operations goes like this (to simplify, I'm going to assume that all items match the condition):Where()
is called, no iteration for now,Where()
returns a special enumerable.ToList()
is called, callingMoveNext()
on the enumerable returned fromWhere()
.Where()
now callsMoveNext()
on the original collection and gets the value.Where()
calls your predicate, which returnstrue
.MoveNext()
called fromToList()
returns,ToList()
gets the value and adds it to the list.What this means is that if all n items in the original collection match the condition,
MoveNext()
will be called 2n times, n times fromWhere()
and n times fromToList()
.