Logo Questions Linux Laravel Mysql Ubuntu Git Menu
 

Is there a simple way to write a custom function in LINQ to Entities?

I'm writing a simple search query for my Entity Framework application. I need to check if a bunch of fields are null, and if not, call ToLower() on them and compare to the search query. The LINQ query looks something like this:

public IQueryable<Store> SearchStores(string q, IQueryable<Store> source)
{
    q = q.ToLower();

    return (
        from s in source
        where (
            (s.Name != null && s.Name.ToLower().Contains(q)) ||
            (s.Description != null && s.Description.ToLower().Contains(q)) ||
            ...
}

There are a lot of lines like this, so I was tempted to write a helper method to clean it up a bit:

public static bool SafeSearch(this string s, string q)
{
    return s == null ? false : s.ToLower().Contains(q);
}

This of course doesn't work, though, since LINQ to entities doesn't understand what the SafeSearch function is:

LINQ to Entities does not recognize the method 'Boolean SafeSearch(System.String, System.String)' method, and this method cannot be translated into a store expression.

Is there an easy way to write a simple custom function like this?

Thanks!

like image 384
ManicBlowfish Avatar asked May 07 '12 15:05

ManicBlowfish


People also ask

Can we use LINQ with Entity Framework?

LINQ to Entities provides Language-Integrated Query (LINQ) support that enables developers to write queries against the Entity Framework conceptual model using Visual Basic or Visual C#. Queries against the Entity Framework are represented by command tree queries, which execute against the object context.

How do you call a function in Entity Framework?

Step 1: Create an entity class which inherits “DbContext” class. Step 2: The following is the structure of the database with table and stored procedure. Step 3: Create a class to store the returned tabular value. Step 4: Create an object for the entity above and method to call a function.

Is LINQ good for performance?

It is slightly slowerLINQ syntax is typically less efficient than a foreach loop. It's good to be aware of any performance tradeoff that might occur when you use LINQ to improve the readability of your code. And if you'd like to measure the performance difference, you can use a tool like BenchmarkDotNet to do so.

What is the difference between LINQ to SQL and Entity Framework?

LINQ to SQL allow you to query and modify SQL Server database by using LINQ syntax. Entity framework is a great ORM shipped by Microsoft which allow you to query and modify RDBMS like SQL Server, Oracle, DB2 and MySQL etc. by using LINQ syntax. Today, EF is widely used by each and every .


2 Answers

Since linq uses expression that are not executed until you actually calling the database, you would need to wrap your function inside of a predicate.

private static Func<Country, bool> Predicate(string q)
{
    return x => (
        q.SafeSearch(x.Name) ||
        q.SafeSearch(x.Description)
        );
}

Also reversing the SafeSearch extension method by calling it on query, will take care of cases where x.Name is null.

public static class SearchExt
{
    public static bool SafeSearch(this string q, string param)
    {
        return param == null ? false : param.ToLower().Contains(q);
    }
}

and then you could use it with extesion methods

return source.Where(Predicate(q));

or by using linq expression

return from p in source
       where Predicate(q).Invoke(p)
       select p;
like image 101
Nikita Ignatov Avatar answered Nov 10 '22 04:11

Nikita Ignatov


There is a way to prepare dynamic queries and conditions, and also to use functions to build parts of them. The syntax is also readable, which would do for the "simple" part of the question. It's possible through combining Linq expressions. There are several articles on how this can be done, but I think I came up with a new approach. At least I didn't find it on web.

To proceed you need a library of 3 simple functions. They use System.Linq.Expressions.ExpressionVisitor to dynamically modify expressions. The key feature is unifying parameters inside the expression, so that 2 parameters with the same name were made identical (UnifyParametersByName). The remaining part is replacing a named parameter with given expression (ReplacePar) and a helper method (NewExpr). The library is available with MIT license on github: LinqExprHelper, but you may quickly write something on your own.

First you define some methods, that may later be used in creating dynamic queries.

public class Store
{
    ...

    public static Expression<Func<Store, bool>>
        SafeSearchName(string sWhat)
    {
        return LinqExprHelper.NewExpr(
            (Store s) => s.Name != null && s.Name.ToLower().Contains(sWhat)
        );
    }

    public static Expression<Func<Store, bool>>
        SafeSearchDesc(string sWhat)
    {
        return LinqExprHelper.NewExpr(
            (Store s) => s.Description != null && s.Description.ToLower().Contains(sWhat)
        );
    }
}

Then you query in this way:

    // Define a master condition, using named parameters.
    var masterExpr = LinqExprHelper.NewExpr(
        (Store s, bool bSearchName, bool bSearchDesc)
        => (bSearchName && bSearchDesc));

    // Replace stub parameters with some real conditions.
    var combExpr = masterExpr
        .ReplacePar("bSearchName", Store.SafeSearchName("b").Body)
        .ReplacePar("bSearchDesc", Store.SafeSearchDesc("p").Body);
        // Sometimes you may skip a condition using this syntax:
        //.ReplacePar("bSearchDesc", Expression.Constant(true));

    // It's interesting to see how the final expression looks like.
    Console.WriteLine("expr: " + combExpr);

   // Execute the query using combined expression.
   db.Stores
        .Where((Expression<Func<Store, bool>>)combExpr)
        .ToList().ForEach(i => { Console.WriteLine(i.Name + ", " + i.Description); });

I didn't use this in production yet, but some simple tests are passed. I don't see any limits in combining queries this way. If we need more parameters we can append additional level of combining. The advantage of this method is that you can use inline lambda expressions, which are nice to read, together with dynamic expression creation and composition, which is very capable.

Is it "simple" after all? If you consider method syntax of Linq as simple, then this is nearly that simple. It doesn't allow you to create custom Linq functions, but gives you comparable capabilities.

like image 22
Jarekczek Avatar answered Nov 10 '22 02:11

Jarekczek