Skip to main content

Applying LINQ principles to business logic

This was inspired by a conversation I was having with @leeoades & @hamishdotnet at work earlier this week, we were discussing the use of Yield keyword to short-cut method execution. Lee has a great post about sequences here. I wanted to get down how my thinking about the Yield keyword has now changed.

Historically I've always thought about using the yield when I'm defining a custom enumerator method, something like GetFooEnumerator - typically I'd have placed this on some kind of model object to allow the easy iteration of some child model instances. Lee was saying why not use yield where ever you have the following usage pattern:

   1:  public IEnumerable<int> Range(int start, int end)
   2:  {
   3:      var numbers = new List<int>();
   4:      for (var i = start; i < end; i++)
   5:      {
   6:          // Do some business logic here...
   7:          numbers.Add(i);
   8:      }
   9:   
  10:      return numbers;
  11:  }

When ever you have a method which internally creates & populates a collection and then returns the collection why not use yield to make it more efficient?

This got me thinking, what kind of improvement efficiency are we talking about?

Time for a quick test, first we need a couple of methods to compare, first one very similar to above and another making use of the yield keyword but both achieving the same logic - returning a collection of numbers to the caller:

   1:  public class Numbers
   2:  {
   3:      public IEnumerable<int> Range(int start, int end)
   4:      {
   5:          var numbers = new List<int>();
   6:          for (var i = start; i < end; i++)
   7:          {
   8:              numbers.Add(i);
   9:          }
  10:   
  11:          return numbers;
  12:      }
  13:   
  14:      public IEnumerable<int> YieldRange(int start, int end)
  15:      {
  16:          for (var i = start; i < end; i++)
  17:          {
  18:              yield return i;
  19:          }
  20:      }
  21:  }

Then a test program - use each method as part of LINQ call to validate the returned sequences contain the number 420:

   1:  static void Main(string[] args)
   2:  {
   3:      Console.WriteLine();
   4:   
   5:      var numbers = new Numbers();
   6:   
   7:      var sw = new Stopwatch();
   8:      sw.Start();
   9:      var found1 = numbers.Range(0, 999).Any(n => n == 420);
  10:      sw.Stop();
  11:   
  12:      Console.WriteLine("Normal Loop: ticks = " + sw.ElapsedTicks);
  13:   
  14:      var sw2 = new Stopwatch();
  15:      sw2.Start();
  16:      var found2 = numbers.YieldRange(0, 999).Any(n => n == 420);
  17:      sw2.Stop();
  18:             
  19:      Console.WriteLine("   Yielding: ticks = " + sw2.ElapsedTicks);
  20:      Console.ReadLine();
  21:  }

Running this up I got the following output!
What!

I wasn't expecting it to be slower, after all the YeildRange method only has to iterate 420 times before finding a match where as the Range method has to iterate over all 1000 numbers before returning...

Then @hamishdotnet pointed out the cost of yielding and I remembered the chapter in Jon Skeet's C# In Depth about iterator blocks and how a set of classes are created by the compiler when ever you use the yield keyword.

Then I had the realisation the methods didn't really have any 'business logic' - DOH!

Basically the 2 implementations don't do anything, so to simulate this I put a Thread.Sleep in to represent an I/O or processor bound call:

   1:  public class Numbers
   2:  {
   3:      public IEnumerable<int> Range(int start, int end)
   4:      {
   5:          var numbers = new List<int>();
   6:          for (var i = start; i < end; i++)
   7:          {
   8:              System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(10);
   9:              numbers.Add(i);
  10:          }
  11:   
  12:          return numbers;
  13:      }
  14:   
  15:      public IEnumerable<int> YieldRange(int start, int end)
  16:      {
  17:          for (var i = start; i < end; i++)
  18:          {
  19:              System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(10);
  20:              yield return i;
  21:          }
  22:      }
  23:  }

More promising results now...

So what do I mean by 'Applying LINQ principles to business logic'?

By thinking about concepts such as 'lazy evaluation' & 'materialization' when designing your methods you allow for the opportunities for your code to be more efficiently executed when used as part of any linq queries.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

WPF tips & tricks: Dispatcher thread performance

Not blogged for an age, and I received an email last week which provoked me back to life. It was a job spec for a WPF contract where they want help sorting out the performance of their app especially around grids and tabular data. I thought I'd shared some tips & tricks I've picked up along the way, these aren't probably going to solve any issues you might be having directly, but they might point you in the right direction when trying to find and resolve performance issues with a WPF app. First off, performance is something you shouldn't try and improve without evidence, and this means having evidence proving you've improved the performance - before & after metrics for example. Without this you're basically pissing into the wind, which can be fun from a developer point of view but bad for a project :) So, what do I mean by ' Dispatcher thread performance '? The 'dispatcher thread' or the 'UI thread' is probably the most

Showing a message box from a ViewModel in MVVM

I was doing a code review with a client last week for a WPF app using MVVM and they asked ' How can I show a message from the ViewModel? '. What follows is how I would (and have) solved the problem in the past. When I hear the words ' show a message... ' I instantly think you mean show a transient modal message box that requires the user input before continuing ' with something else ' - once the user has interacted with the message box it will disappear. The following solution only applies to this scenario. The first solution is the easiest but is very wrong from a separation perspective. It violates the ideas behind the Model-View-Controller pattern because it places View concerns inside the ViewModel - the ViewModel now knows about the type of the View and specifically it knows how to show a message box window: The second approach addresses this concern by introducing the idea of messaging\events between the ViewModel and the View. In the example below

Implementing a busy indicator using a visual overlay in MVVM

This is a technique we use at work to lock the UI whilst some long running process is happening - preventing the user clicking on stuff whilst it's retrieving or rendering data. Now we could have done this by launching a child dialog window but that feels rather out of date and clumsy, we wanted a more modern pattern similar to the way <div> overlays are done on the web. Imagine we have the following simple WPF app and when 'Click' is pressed a busy waiting overlay is shown for the duration entered into the text box. What I'm interested in here is not the actual UI element of the busy indicator but how I go about getting this to show & hide from when using MVVM. The actual UI elements are the standard Busy Indicator coming from the WPF Toolkit : The XAML behind this window is very simple, the important part is the ViewHost. As you can see the ViewHost uses a ContentPresenter element which is bound to the view model, IMainViewModel, it contains 3 child v