Well, you can use Expression.AndAlso
/ OrElse
etc to combine logical expressions, but the problem is the parameters; are you working with the same ParameterExpression
in expr1 and expr2? If so, it is easier:
var body = Expression.AndAlso(expr1.Body, expr2.Body);
var lambda = Expression.Lambda<Func<T,bool>>(body, expr1.Parameters[0]);
This also works well to negate a single operation:
static Expression<Func<T, bool>> Not<T>(
this Expression<Func<T, bool>> expr)
{
return Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(
Expression.Not(expr.Body), expr.Parameters[0]);
}
Otherwise, depending on the LINQ provider, you might be able to combine them with Invoke
:
// OrElse is very similar...
static Expression<Func<T, bool>> AndAlso<T>(
this Expression<Func<T, bool>> left,
Expression<Func<T, bool>> right)
{
var param = Expression.Parameter(typeof(T), "x");
var body = Expression.AndAlso(
Expression.Invoke(left, param),
Expression.Invoke(right, param)
);
var lambda = Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(body, param);
return lambda;
}
Somewhere, I have got some code that re-writes an expression-tree replacing nodes to remove the need for Invoke
, but it is quite lengthy (and I can't remember where I left it...)
Generalized version that picks the simplest route:
static Expression<Func<T, bool>> AndAlso<T>(
this Expression<Func<T, bool>> expr1,
Expression<Func<T, bool>> expr2)
{
// need to detect whether they use the same
// parameter instance; if not, they need fixing
ParameterExpression param = expr1.Parameters[0];
if (ReferenceEquals(param, expr2.Parameters[0]))
{
// simple version
return Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(
Expression.AndAlso(expr1.Body, expr2.Body), param);
}
// otherwise, keep expr1 "as is" and invoke expr2
return Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(
Expression.AndAlso(
expr1.Body,
Expression.Invoke(expr2, param)), param);
}
Starting from .NET 4.0, there is the ExpressionVisitor
class which allows you to build expressions that are EF safe.
public static Expression<Func<T, bool>> AndAlso<T>(
this Expression<Func<T, bool>> expr1,
Expression<Func<T, bool>> expr2)
{
var parameter = Expression.Parameter(typeof (T));
var leftVisitor = new ReplaceExpressionVisitor(expr1.Parameters[0], parameter);
var left = leftVisitor.Visit(expr1.Body);
var rightVisitor = new ReplaceExpressionVisitor(expr2.Parameters[0], parameter);
var right = rightVisitor.Visit(expr2.Body);
return Expression.Lambda<Func<T, bool>>(
Expression.AndAlso(left, right), parameter);
}
private class ReplaceExpressionVisitor
: ExpressionVisitor
{
private readonly Expression _oldValue;
private readonly Expression _newValue;
public ReplaceExpressionVisitor(Expression oldValue, Expression newValue)
{
_oldValue = oldValue;
_newValue = newValue;
}
public override Expression Visit(Expression node)
{
if (node == _oldValue)
return _newValue;
return base.Visit(node);
}
}
Best Answer
Since the underlying physical table column is
nvarchar
notdatetime
, I think you are out of luck. The LINQ2SQL provider knows that it isnvarchar
data, and therefore will not generate native SQL expressions that deal with it as adatetime
value.To be honest, I can't even see a safe way of doing this with raw hand-crafted
SqlCommand
objects. You really ought to read the data into memory asString
, then convert it toDateTimeOffset
, then manually filter it in memory. If you want native SQL filtering on this column, you need to change the table schema.