I'm trying to track down a bug in our code. I've boiled it down to the snippet below. In the example below I have a grid of ints (a list of rows), but I want to find the indexes of the columns that have a 1. The implementation of this is to create an enumerator for each row and step through each column in turn by keeping the enumerators in step.
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var ints = new List<List<int>> {
new List<int> {0, 0, 1}, // This row has a 1 at index 2
new List<int> {0, 1, 0}, // This row has a 1 at index 1
new List<int> {0, 0, 1} // This row also has a 1 at index 2
};
var result = IndexesWhereThereIsOneInTheColumn(ints);
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(", ", result)); // Expected: "1, 2"
Console.ReadKey();
}
private static IEnumerable<int> IndexesWhereThereIsOneInTheColumn(
IEnumerable<List<int>> myIntsGrid)
{
var enumerators = myIntsGrid.Select(c => c.GetEnumerator()).ToList();
short i = 0;
while (enumerators.All(e => e.MoveNext())) {
if (enumerators.Any(e => e.Current == 1))
yield return i;
i++;
if (i > 1000)
throw new Exception("You have gone too far!!!");
}
}
}
However I have noticed that MoveNext()
is not remembered each time around the while
loop. MoveNext()
always returns true, and Current
is always 0. Is this a purposeful feature of Linq to make it more side effect free?
I noticed that this works:
private static IEnumerable<int> IndexesWhereThereIsOneInTheColumn(
IEnumerable<List<int>> myIntsGrid)
{
var enumerators = myIntsGrid.Select(c =>
c.ToArray().GetEnumerator()).ToList(); // added ToArray()
short i = 0;
while (enumerators.All(e => e.MoveNext())) {
if (enumerators.Any(e => (int)e.Current == 1)) // added cast to int
yield return i;
i++;
}
}
So is this just a problem with List?
If MoveNext passes the end of the collection, the enumerator is positioned after the last element in the collection and MoveNext returns false .
IEnumerable is an interface defining a single method GetEnumerator() that returns an IEnumerator interface. It is the base interface for all non-generic collections that can be enumerated. This works for read-only access to a collection that implements that IEnumerable can be used with a foreach statement.
In the C# language, enum (also called enumeration) is a user-defined value type used to represent a list of named integer constants. It is created using the enum keyword inside a class, structure, or namespace. It improves a program's readability, maintainability and reduces complexity.
It is because the enumerator of List<T>
is a struct
whereas the enumerator of Array
is a class
.
So when you call Enumerable.All
with the struct, copy of enumerator is made and passed as a parameter to Func
since structs are copied by value. So e.MoveNext
is called on the copy, not the original.
Try this:
Console.WriteLine(new List<int>().GetEnumerator().GetType().IsValueType);
Console.WriteLine(new int[]{}.GetEnumerator().GetType().IsValueType);
It prints:
True
False
As Sriram Sakthivel's answer says the issue is due to lack of boxing and accidentally the list enumerator implementation being a struct
, not a reference type. Usually, one would not expect the value-type behavior for an enumerator, as most are either exposed by the IEnumerator
/IEnumerator<T>
interfaces, or are reference types themselves. A quick way to go around this is to change this line
var enumerators = myIntsGrid.Select(c => c.GetEnumerator()).ToList();
to
var enumerators
= myIntsGrid.Select(c => (IEnumerator) c.GetEnumerator()).ToList();
instead.
The above code will construct a list of already boxed enumerators, which will be treated as reference type instances, because of the interface cast. From that moment on, they should behave as you expect them to in your later code.
If you need a generic enumerator (to avoid casts when latter using the enumerator.Current
property), you can cast to the appropriate generic IEnumerator<T>
interface:
c => (IEnumerator<int>) c.GetEnumerator()
or even better
c => c.GetEnumerator() as IEnumerator<int>
The as
keyword is said to perform a lot better than direct casts, and in the case of a loop it could bring an essential performance benefit. Just be careful that as
returns null
if the cast fails As per Flater's request from comments:. In the OP's case, it is guaranteed the enumerator implements IEnumerator<int>
, so it is safe to go for an as
cast.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With