Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattmanser | Hacker News Reader

I hate to be nit-picky, what you're presenting is non-idiomatic C#, I would guess you're not a C# programmer. No-one really uses the SQL-esque langugage. The simple methods reads better, are quicker to type, are clearer and are more succinct. 'p', 'q' also tends to be the de facto standard operator in lambda expressions, rather than 'x', 'y' or 'i', 'j'. And why would you use IEnumerable<int> where you used it, it makes no sense?

Your code should have read:

    var numbers = new List<int>() { 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
    var newList = numbers.AsParallel().Select(p => p + 1);

View on HN

> 'p', 'q' also tends to be the de facto standard operator in lambda expressions, rather than 'x', 'y' or 'i', 'j'.

The authors of the plinq library are clearly not C# developers then. https://github.com/dotnet/corefx/search?p=1&q=select&utf8=%E...

I tend to use a letter somewhat related to the object I'm running the query against. Like 'c' for a List<Customer>.

While using i,j,k as loop variables have a long tradition behind them (from FORTRAN77, IIRC), no reason to limit myself when using Linq.

>I hate to be nit-picky

Then don't :). What you've presented is very much like saying "I don't encounter many people with your style of programming and thus, no one uses that style and you're not an actual programmer in this language".

Don't forget that there are varying styles of doing things. You use 'p'? great! Others will use foo, i, j, lalal, etc. No need to get worked up over such a minor issue and detract from the actual conversation at hand.

> No-one really uses the SQL-esque langugage.

Of course we do. I wrote this just the other day:

  var salesAndReturns = from sale in sales
				 join return in returns on new { StockId = sale.StockId, ClientStockId = sale.ClientStockId, SellPointId = sale.SellPointId }
					equals new { StockId = return.StockId, ClientStockId = return.ClientStockId, SellPointId = return.SellPointId } into gpu
					from subreturn in gpu.DefaultIfEmpty()
					select new
					{
						sale.ClientStockId,
						sale.StockId,
						Quantity = -sale.Quantity + (subreturn ?? new SellPointStock()).Quantity
					};

The are no rules restricting us from how we should use LINQ.

No one uses the sql esque language? Where do you get that idea from? I've been a c# dev for 7 years and have seen plenty. For complicate queries it's significantly more compact (and readable, in my opinion).

And using IEnumerable was probably making the point that it didn't have to be a list, it could be anything implementing that interface.

Ach, come on, the briefest trawl through recent SO questions and you'll see the % of DSLs has dropped to a small amount since it launched.

Downvoters be damned, they know not what they talk about. ultimape is clearly not a C# developer.

I know people with 10 years experience with the language that still use the DSL for simple cases.

There is a lot of discussion about the usage of var, and ultimape's non-usage of it in his example is a personal preference, as well as making sense in an educational post.

And lastly, I think you'll find many developers, young and old alike, use x, y and z as their lambda parameters. I do too. It comes from the mathematical function origin of the syntax. In most early examples when it was introduced, and loads of educational materials now, lambda syntax is still presented akin to a mathematical formula:

x => x+1

In that context, using x makes a lot more sense than p, and has stuck around as a habit. It's a style thing, and everybody has their own style. You don't get to claim superior experience or skill based on a 2 line snippet that doesn't match your style.

And as an aside: you're not being downvoted by "the ignorant masses". You're being downvoted for being confrontational and not contributing to a conversation about the topic, which is Parallel LINQ and not coding style.

For simpler stuff, ya, DSL is not handy at all. But for the complex ones, shame on you if you don't DSL it. And don't come with percentage of SO questions bullshit, that's bad programmer excuse.

For longer queries, that little DSL syntax it's a bless. It's way more pleasant to read, write or think about it than the alternative.

Ah, and since you care so much about it, I've been developing in C# for freaking years that I don't bother to sum it up anymore.

"Ach"? "Trawl"? No one uses those words. You're clearly not an English speaker.

They're reasonably prevalent in Scotland

Tch, come on, the briefest trawl through recent blog posts and you'll see the % of Scottish idioms has dropped to a small amount since people have been blogging. Downvoters be damned, they know not what they talk about. mattmanser is clearly not an English speaker.

SO is as much about making yourself look as smart as possible while still needing help. I would bet half of the folks submitting questions over linq use resharper to "nerdify" their code before they submit it...

Not a fan of the DSL myself, but plenty of people in this C# shop here use it. Plus, replacing 'let' becomes ugly using methods rather quickly, for example.

I use the query syntax. And I have since .net 3 came out. I also use extension methods. In particular "let" can be much easier to accomplish in the query syntax. And I've usually used the first letter of the type I'm dealing with for my lambda parameters. I've never seen any standard that favored p or q.

I'd have to disagree. Sure for the simple one liner this is true. But start doing let bindings, group by, etc.. and the standard methods can get very messy.

There is nothing wrong with the DSL syntax at all.

I prefer the non SQL-esque way also, I find it prettier, and I rarely see it at work. As for q and p, and I always use i, and I see lots of other random letters. Does the letter used really matter?

How do you write joins? I find them readable with the SQL-esque way, but I haven't found a nice way to write them with the 'code' way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com