Get next N elements from enumerable

Question

Context: C# 3.0, .Net 3.5
Suppose I have a method that generates random numbers (forever):

private static IEnumerable<int> RandomNumberGenerator() {
    while (true) yield return GenerateRandomNumber(0, 100);
}

I need to group those numbers in groups of 10, so I would like something like:

foreach (IEnumerable<int> group in RandomNumberGenerator().Slice(10)) {
    Assert.That(group.Count() == 10);
}

I have defined Slice method, but I feel there should be one already defined. Here is my Slice method, just for reference:

    private static IEnumerable<T[]> Slice<T>(IEnumerable<T> enumerable, int size) {
        var result = new List<T>(size);
        foreach (var item in enumerable) {
            result.Add(item);
            if (result.Count == size) {
                yield return result.ToArray();
                result.Clear();
            }
        }
    }

Question: is there an easier way to accomplish what I'm trying to do? Perhaps Linq?

Note: above example is a simplification, in my program I have an Iterator that scans given matrix in a non-linear fashion.

EDIT: Why Skip+Take is no good.

Effectively what I want is:

var group1 = RandomNumberGenerator().Skip(0).Take(10);
var group2 = RandomNumberGenerator().Skip(10).Take(10);
var group3 = RandomNumberGenerator().Skip(20).Take(10);
var group4 = RandomNumberGenerator().Skip(30).Take(10);

without the overhead of regenerating number (10+20+30+40) times. I need a solution that will generate exactly 40 numbers and break those in 4 groups by 10.

Answer 1

Using Skip and Take would be a very bad idea. Calling Skip on an indexed collection may be fine, but calling it on any arbitrary IEnumerable<T> is liable to result in enumeration over the number of elements skipped, which means that if you're calling it repeatedly you're enumerating over the sequence an order of magnitude more times than you need to be.

Complain of "premature optimization" all you want; but that is just ridiculous.

I think your Slice method is about as good as it gets. I was going to suggest a different approach that would provide deferred execution and obviate the intermediate array allocation, but that is a dangerous game to play (i.e., if you try something like ToList on such a resulting IEnumerable<T> implementation, without enumerating over the inner collections, you'll end up in an endless loop).

(I've removed what was originally here, as the OP's improvements since posting the question have since rendered my suggestions here redundant.)

Answer 2

Are Skip and Take of any use to you?

Use a combination of the two in a loop to get what you want.

So,

list.Skip(10).Take(10);

Skips the first 10 records and then takes the next 10.

Answer 3

I have done something similar. But I would like it to be simpler:

//Remove "this" if you don't want it to be a extension method
public static IEnumerable<IList<T>> Chunks<T>(this IEnumerable<T> xs, int size)
{
    var curr = new List<T>(size);

    foreach (var x in xs)
    {
        curr.Add(x);

        if (curr.Count == size)
        {
            yield return curr;
            curr = new List<T>(size);
        }
    }
}

I think yours are flawed. You return the same array for all your chunks/slices so only the last chunk/slice you take would have the correct data.

Addition: Array version:

public static IEnumerable<T[]> Chunks<T>(this IEnumerable<T> xs, int size)
{
    var curr = new T[size];

    int i = 0;

    foreach (var x in xs)
    {
        curr[i % size] = x;

        if (++i % size == 0)
        {
            yield return curr;
            curr = new T[size];
        }
    }
}

Addition: Linq version (not C# 2.0). As pointed out, it will not work on infinite sequences and will be a great deal slower than the alternatives:

public static IEnumerable<T[]> Chunks<T>(this IEnumerable<T> xs, int size)
{
    return xs.Select((x, i) => new { x, i })
             .GroupBy(xi => xi.i / size, xi => xi.x)
             .Select(g => g.ToArray());
}