Search Results

Search found 67 results on 3 pages for 'trygetvalue'.

Page 2/3 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3  | Next Page >

  • C# GroupJoin effectiveness

    - by bsnote
    without using GroupJoin: var playersDictionary = players.ToDictionary(player => player.Id, element => new PlayerDto { Rounds = new List<RoundDto>() }); foreach (var round in rounds) { PlayerDto playerDto; playersDictionary.TryGetValue(round.PlayerId, out playerDto); if (playerDto != null) { playerDto.Rounds.Add(new RoundDto { }); } } var playerDtoItems = playersDictionary.Values; using GroupJoin: var playerDtoItems = from player in players join round in rounds on player.Id equals round.PlayerId into playerRounds select new PlayerDto { Rounds = playerRounds.Select(playerRound => new RoundDto {}) }; Which of these two pieces is more efficient?

    Read the article

  • Selecting a value from multiple dictionaries inside an enumeration

    - by johaanfaust
    If I have an enumeration of dictionaries IEnumerable<IDictionary<string, float>> enumeration can I perform a Linq query on it so that I can select by a value from each dictionary in the enumeration using the same key? I can do this in a loop: float f; foreach (var dictionary in enumeration) { if (dictionary.TryGetValue("some key", out f)) { Console.WriteLine(f); } } (The eventual plan is to compare the performance of the query verses the equivalent nested looping statements (the enumeration itself is formed from either another query or an equivalent set of loops).)

    Read the article

  • How do I search for values in a dictionary

    - by fishhead
    what would be the best way to search for a value in a dictionary. for instance I would like to search for modified objects, would going through the entire collection be the only way to do this? c#, .net 2.0 class RecA { public bool modified {get;set:} public string{get;set;} } class RecA_Dic : Dictionary<int,Rec_A> { public bool GetItemByKey(int key,out obj) { return this.TryGetValue(key, out obj); } public List<Rec_A> getModifiedItems() { List<Rec_A> li = new List<Rec_A>(); for(int i=0;i<this.count;i++) if (((Rec_A)this[i]).modified == true) li.Add((Rec_A)this[i]); return li; } }

    Read the article

  • C# GroupJoin efficiency

    - by bsnote
    without using GroupJoin: var playersDictionary = players.ToDictionary(player => player.Id, element => new PlayerDto { Rounds = new List<RoundDto>() }); foreach (var round in rounds) { PlayerDto playerDto; playersDictionary.TryGetValue(round.PlayerId, out playerDto); if (playerDto != null) { playerDto.Rounds.Add(new RoundDto { }); } } var playerDtoItems = playersDictionary.Values; using GroupJoin: var playerDtoItems = from player in players join round in rounds on player.Id equals round.PlayerId into playerRounds select new PlayerDto { Rounds = playerRounds.Select(playerRound => new RoundDto {}) }; Which of these two pieces is more efficient?

    Read the article

  • In C#: How to declare a generic Dictionary whose key and value types have a common constraint type?

    - by Marcel
    Hi all, I want to declare a dictionary that stores typed IEnumerable's of a specific type, with that exact type as key, like so: private IDictionary<T, IEnumerable<T>> _dataOfType where T: BaseClass; //does not compile! The concrete classes I want to store, all derive from BaseClass, therefore the idea to use it as constraint. The compiler complains that it expects a semicolon after the member name. If it would work, I would expect this would make the later retrieval from the dictionary simple like: IEnumerable<ConcreteData> concreteData; _sitesOfType.TryGetValue(typeof(ConcreteType), out concreteData); How to define such a dictionary?

    Read the article

  • How should I ReaderWriterLockSlim and Dictionary<MyKeyClass,MyValueClass>?

    - by DayOne
    So the question is when should I use EnterReadLock() and EnterWriteLock() when accessing the Dictionary? TryGetValue. I think a ReadLock should be ok here. Updating the Dictionary using the Indexer e.g. _dic[existingKey] = NewValue. I think a ReadLock should be OK here. Add a new item using the Indexer e.g. _dic[newKey] = NewValue. I think I need a WriteLock here. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Word Counter Implementation

    - by kenny
    Is there a better way than the following brute foce implementation of a c# word counting class? UPDATED CODE: Sorry! /// <summary> /// A word counting class. /// </summary> public class WordCounter { Dictionary<string, int> dictTest = new Dictionary<string, int> (); /// <summary> /// Enters a word and returns the current number of times that word was found. /// </summary> /// <param name="word">The word or string found.</param> /// <returns>Count of times Found() was called with provided word.</returns> public int Found ( string word ) { int count = 1; return dictTest.TryGetValue ( word, out count ) ? ++dictTest[word] : dictTest[word] = 1; } }

    Read the article

  • C#/.NET Little Wonders: The Concurrent Collections (1 of 3)

    - by James Michael Hare
    Once again we consider some of the lesser known classes and keywords of C#.  In the next few weeks, we will discuss the concurrent collections and how they have changed the face of concurrent programming. This week’s post will begin with a general introduction and discuss the ConcurrentStack<T> and ConcurrentQueue<T>.  Then in the following post we’ll discuss the ConcurrentDictionary<T> and ConcurrentBag<T>.  Finally, we shall close on the third post with a discussion of the BlockingCollection<T>. For more of the "Little Wonders" posts, see the index here. A brief history of collections In the beginning was the .NET 1.0 Framework.  And out of this framework emerged the System.Collections namespace, and it was good.  It contained all the basic things a growing programming language needs like the ArrayList and Hashtable collections.  The main problem, of course, with these original collections is that they held items of type object which means you had to be disciplined enough to use them correctly or you could end up with runtime errors if you got an object of a type you weren't expecting. Then came .NET 2.0 and generics and our world changed forever!  With generics the C# language finally got an equivalent of the very powerful C++ templates.  As such, the System.Collections.Generic was born and we got type-safe versions of all are favorite collections.  The List<T> succeeded the ArrayList and the Dictionary<TKey,TValue> succeeded the Hashtable and so on.  The new versions of the library were not only safer because they checked types at compile-time, in many cases they were more performant as well.  So much so that it's Microsoft's recommendation that the System.Collections original collections only be used for backwards compatibility. So we as developers came to know and love the generic collections and took them into our hearts and embraced them.  The problem is, thread safety in both the original collections and the generic collections can be problematic, for very different reasons. Now, if you are only doing single-threaded development you may not care – after all, no locking is required.  Even if you do have multiple threads, if a collection is “load-once, read-many” you don’t need to do anything to protect that container from multi-threaded access, as illustrated below: 1: public static class OrderTypeTranslator 2: { 3: // because this dictionary is loaded once before it is ever accessed, we don't need to synchronize 4: // multi-threaded read access 5: private static readonly Dictionary<string, char> _translator = new Dictionary<string, char> 6: { 7: {"New", 'N'}, 8: {"Update", 'U'}, 9: {"Cancel", 'X'} 10: }; 11:  12: // the only public interface into the dictionary is for reading, so inherently thread-safe 13: public static char? Translate(string orderType) 14: { 15: char charValue; 16: if (_translator.TryGetValue(orderType, out charValue)) 17: { 18: return charValue; 19: } 20:  21: return null; 22: } 23: } Unfortunately, most of our computer science problems cannot get by with just single-threaded applications or with multi-threading in a load-once manner.  Looking at  today's trends, it's clear to see that computers are not so much getting faster because of faster processor speeds -- we've nearly reached the limits we can push through with today's technologies -- but more because we're adding more cores to the boxes.  With this new hardware paradigm, it is even more important to use multi-threaded applications to take full advantage of parallel processing to achieve higher application speeds. So let's look at how to use collections in a thread-safe manner. Using historical collections in a concurrent fashion The early .NET collections (System.Collections) had a Synchronized() static method that could be used to wrap the early collections to make them completely thread-safe.  This paradigm was dropped in the generic collections (System.Collections.Generic) because having a synchronized wrapper resulted in atomic locks for all operations, which could prove overkill in many multithreading situations.  Thus the paradigm shifted to having the user of the collection specify their own locking, usually with an external object: 1: public class OrderAggregator 2: { 3: private static readonly Dictionary<string, List<Order>> _orders = new Dictionary<string, List<Order>>(); 4: private static readonly _orderLock = new object(); 5:  6: public void Add(string accountNumber, Order newOrder) 7: { 8: List<Order> ordersForAccount; 9:  10: // a complex operation like this should all be protected 11: lock (_orderLock) 12: { 13: if (!_orders.TryGetValue(accountNumber, out ordersForAccount)) 14: { 15: _orders.Add(accountNumber, ordersForAccount = new List<Order>()); 16: } 17:  18: ordersForAccount.Add(newOrder); 19: } 20: } 21: } Notice how we’re performing several operations on the dictionary under one lock.  With the Synchronized() static methods of the early collections, you wouldn’t be able to specify this level of locking (a more macro-level).  So in the generic collections, it was decided that if a user needed synchronization, they could implement their own locking scheme instead so that they could provide synchronization as needed. The need for better concurrent access to collections Here’s the problem: it’s relatively easy to write a collection that locks itself down completely for access, but anything more complex than that can be difficult and error-prone to write, and much less to make it perform efficiently!  For example, what if you have a Dictionary that has frequent reads but in-frequent updates?  Do you want to lock down the entire Dictionary for every access?  This would be overkill and would prevent concurrent reads.  In such cases you could use something like a ReaderWriterLockSlim which allows for multiple readers in a lock, and then once a writer grabs the lock it blocks all further readers until the writer is done (in a nutshell).  This is all very complex stuff to consider. Fortunately, this is where the Concurrent Collections come in.  The Parallel Computing Platform team at Microsoft went through great pains to determine how to make a set of concurrent collections that would have the best performance characteristics for general case multi-threaded use. Now, as in all things involving threading, you should always make sure you evaluate all your container options based on the particular usage scenario and the degree of parallelism you wish to acheive. This article should not be taken to understand that these collections are always supperior to the generic collections. Each fills a particular need for a particular situation. Understanding what each container is optimized for is key to the success of your application whether it be single-threaded or multi-threaded. General points to consider with the concurrent collections The MSDN points out that the concurrent collections all support the ICollection interface. However, since the collections are already synchronized, the IsSynchronized property always returns false, and SyncRoot always returns null.  Thus you should not attempt to use these properties for synchronization purposes. Note that since the concurrent collections also may have different operations than the traditional data structures you may be used to.  Now you may ask why they did this, but it was done out of necessity to keep operations safe and atomic.  For example, in order to do a Pop() on a stack you have to know the stack is non-empty, but between the time you check the stack’s IsEmpty property and then do the Pop() another thread may have come in and made the stack empty!  This is why some of the traditional operations have been changed to make them safe for concurrent use. In addition, some properties and methods in the concurrent collections achieve concurrency by creating a snapshot of the collection, which means that some operations that were traditionally O(1) may now be O(n) in the concurrent models.  I’ll try to point these out as we talk about each collection so you can be aware of any potential performance impacts.  Finally, all the concurrent containers are safe for enumeration even while being modified, but some of the containers support this in different ways (snapshot vs. dirty iteration).  Once again I’ll highlight how thread-safe enumeration works for each collection. ConcurrentStack<T>: The thread-safe LIFO container The ConcurrentStack<T> is the thread-safe counterpart to the System.Collections.Generic.Stack<T>, which as you may remember is your standard last-in-first-out container.  If you think of algorithms that favor stack usage (for example, depth-first searches of graphs and trees) then you can see how using a thread-safe stack would be of benefit. The ConcurrentStack<T> achieves thread-safe access by using System.Threading.Interlocked operations.  This means that the multi-threaded access to the stack requires no traditional locking and is very, very fast! For the most part, the ConcurrentStack<T> behaves like it’s Stack<T> counterpart with a few differences: Pop() was removed in favor of TryPop() Returns true if an item existed and was popped and false if empty. PushRange() and TryPopRange() were added Allows you to push multiple items and pop multiple items atomically. Count takes a snapshot of the stack and then counts the items. This means it is a O(n) operation, if you just want to check for an empty stack, call IsEmpty instead which is O(1). ToArray() and GetEnumerator() both also take snapshots. This means that iteration over a stack will give you a static view at the time of the call and will not reflect updates. Pushing on a ConcurrentStack<T> works just like you’d expect except for the aforementioned PushRange() method that was added to allow you to push a range of items concurrently. 1: var stack = new ConcurrentStack<string>(); 2:  3: // adding to stack is much the same as before 4: stack.Push("First"); 5:  6: // but you can also push multiple items in one atomic operation (no interleaves) 7: stack.PushRange(new [] { "Second", "Third", "Fourth" }); For looking at the top item of the stack (without removing it) the Peek() method has been removed in favor of a TryPeek().  This is because in order to do a peek the stack must be non-empty, but between the time you check for empty and the time you execute the peek the stack contents may have changed.  Thus the TryPeek() was created to be an atomic check for empty, and then peek if not empty: 1: // to look at top item of stack without removing it, can use TryPeek. 2: // Note that there is no Peek(), this is because you need to check for empty first. TryPeek does. 3: string item; 4: if (stack.TryPeek(out item)) 5: { 6: Console.WriteLine("Top item was " + item); 7: } 8: else 9: { 10: Console.WriteLine("Stack was empty."); 11: } Finally, to remove items from the stack, we have the TryPop() for single, and TryPopRange() for multiple items.  Just like the TryPeek(), these operations replace Pop() since we need to ensure atomically that the stack is non-empty before we pop from it: 1: // to remove items, use TryPop or TryPopRange to get multiple items atomically (no interleaves) 2: if (stack.TryPop(out item)) 3: { 4: Console.WriteLine("Popped " + item); 5: } 6:  7: // TryPopRange will only pop up to the number of spaces in the array, the actual number popped is returned. 8: var poppedItems = new string[2]; 9: int numPopped = stack.TryPopRange(poppedItems); 10:  11: foreach (var theItem in poppedItems.Take(numPopped)) 12: { 13: Console.WriteLine("Popped " + theItem); 14: } Finally, note that as stated before, GetEnumerator() and ToArray() gets a snapshot of the data at the time of the call.  That means if you are enumerating the stack you will get a snapshot of the stack at the time of the call.  This is illustrated below: 1: var stack = new ConcurrentStack<string>(); 2:  3: // adding to stack is much the same as before 4: stack.Push("First"); 5:  6: var results = stack.GetEnumerator(); 7:  8: // but you can also push multiple items in one atomic operation (no interleaves) 9: stack.PushRange(new [] { "Second", "Third", "Fourth" }); 10:  11: while(results.MoveNext()) 12: { 13: Console.WriteLine("Stack only has: " + results.Current); 14: } The only item that will be printed out in the above code is "First" because the snapshot was taken before the other items were added. This may sound like an issue, but it’s really for safety and is more correct.  You don’t want to enumerate a stack and have half a view of the stack before an update and half a view of the stack after an update, after all.  In addition, note that this is still thread-safe, whereas iterating through a non-concurrent collection while updating it in the old collections would cause an exception. ConcurrentQueue<T>: The thread-safe FIFO container The ConcurrentQueue<T> is the thread-safe counterpart of the System.Collections.Generic.Queue<T> class.  The concurrent queue uses an underlying list of small arrays and lock-free System.Threading.Interlocked operations on the head and tail arrays.  Once again, this allows us to do thread-safe operations without the need for heavy locks! The ConcurrentQueue<T> (like the ConcurrentStack<T>) has some departures from the non-concurrent counterpart.  Most notably: Dequeue() was removed in favor of TryDequeue(). Returns true if an item existed and was dequeued and false if empty. Count does not take a snapshot It subtracts the head and tail index to get the count.  This results overall in a O(1) complexity which is quite good.  It’s still recommended, however, that for empty checks you call IsEmpty instead of comparing Count to zero. ToArray() and GetEnumerator() both take snapshots. This means that iteration over a queue will give you a static view at the time of the call and will not reflect updates. The Enqueue() method on the ConcurrentQueue<T> works much the same as the generic Queue<T>: 1: var queue = new ConcurrentQueue<string>(); 2:  3: // adding to queue is much the same as before 4: queue.Enqueue("First"); 5: queue.Enqueue("Second"); 6: queue.Enqueue("Third"); For front item access, the TryPeek() method must be used to attempt to see the first item if the queue.  There is no Peek() method since, as you’ll remember, we can only peek on a non-empty queue, so we must have an atomic TryPeek() that checks for empty and then returns the first item if the queue is non-empty. 1: // to look at first item in queue without removing it, can use TryPeek. 2: // Note that there is no Peek(), this is because you need to check for empty first. TryPeek does. 3: string item; 4: if (queue.TryPeek(out item)) 5: { 6: Console.WriteLine("First item was " + item); 7: } 8: else 9: { 10: Console.WriteLine("Queue was empty."); 11: } Then, to remove items you use TryDequeue().  Once again this is for the same reason we have TryPeek() and not Peek(): 1: // to remove items, use TryDequeue. If queue is empty returns false. 2: if (queue.TryDequeue(out item)) 3: { 4: Console.WriteLine("Dequeued first item " + item); 5: } Just like the concurrent stack, the ConcurrentQueue<T> takes a snapshot when you call ToArray() or GetEnumerator() which means that subsequent updates to the queue will not be seen when you iterate over the results.  Thus once again the code below will only show the first item, since the other items were added after the snapshot. 1: var queue = new ConcurrentQueue<string>(); 2:  3: // adding to queue is much the same as before 4: queue.Enqueue("First"); 5:  6: var iterator = queue.GetEnumerator(); 7:  8: queue.Enqueue("Second"); 9: queue.Enqueue("Third"); 10:  11: // only shows First 12: while (iterator.MoveNext()) 13: { 14: Console.WriteLine("Dequeued item " + iterator.Current); 15: } Using collections concurrently You’ll notice in the examples above I stuck to using single-threaded examples so as to make them deterministic and the results obvious.  Of course, if we used these collections in a truly multi-threaded way the results would be less deterministic, but would still be thread-safe and with no locking on your part required! For example, say you have an order processor that takes an IEnumerable<Order> and handles each other in a multi-threaded fashion, then groups the responses together in a concurrent collection for aggregation.  This can be done easily with the TPL’s Parallel.ForEach(): 1: public static IEnumerable<OrderResult> ProcessOrders(IEnumerable<Order> orderList) 2: { 3: var proxy = new OrderProxy(); 4: var results = new ConcurrentQueue<OrderResult>(); 5:  6: // notice that we can process all these in parallel and put the results 7: // into our concurrent collection without needing any external locking! 8: Parallel.ForEach(orderList, 9: order => 10: { 11: var result = proxy.PlaceOrder(order); 12:  13: results.Enqueue(result); 14: }); 15:  16: return results; 17: } Summary Obviously, if you do not need multi-threaded safety, you don’t need to use these collections, but when you do need multi-threaded collections these are just the ticket! The plethora of features (I always think of the movie The Three Amigos when I say plethora) built into these containers and the amazing way they acheive thread-safe access in an efficient manner is wonderful to behold. Stay tuned next week where we’ll continue our discussion with the ConcurrentBag<T> and the ConcurrentDictionary<TKey,TValue>. For some excellent information on the performance of the concurrent collections and how they perform compared to a traditional brute-force locking strategy, see this wonderful whitepaper by the Microsoft Parallel Computing Platform team here.   Tweet Technorati Tags: C#,.NET,Concurrent Collections,Collections,Multi-Threading,Little Wonders,BlackRabbitCoder,James Michael Hare

    Read the article

  • Using the ASP.NET Cache to cache data in a Model or Business Object layer, without a dependency on System.Web in the layer - Part One.

    - by Rhames
    ASP.NET applications can make use of the System.Web.Caching.Cache object to cache data and prevent repeated expensive calls to a database or other store. However, ideally an application should make use of caching at the point where data is retrieved from the database, which typically is inside a Business Objects or Model layer. One of the key features of using a UI pattern such as Model-View-Presenter (MVP) or Model-View-Controller (MVC) is that the Model and Presenter (or Controller) layers are developed without any knowledge of the UI layer. Introducing a dependency on System.Web into the Model layer would break this independence of the Model from the View. This article gives a solution to this problem, using dependency injection to inject the caching implementation into the Model layer at runtime. This allows caching to be used within the Model layer, without any knowledge of the actual caching mechanism that will be used. Create a sample application to use the caching solution Create a test SQL Server database This solution uses a SQL Server database with the same Sales data used in my previous post on calculating running totals. The advantage of using this data is that it gives nice slow queries that will exaggerate the effect of using caching! To create the data, first create a new SQL database called CacheSample. Next run the following script to create the Sale table and populate it: USE CacheSample GO   CREATE TABLE Sale(DayCount smallint, Sales money) CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX ndx_DayCount ON Sale(DayCount) go INSERT Sale VALUES (1,120) INSERT Sale VALUES (2,60) INSERT Sale VALUES (3,125) INSERT Sale VALUES (4,40)   DECLARE @DayCount smallint, @Sales money SET @DayCount = 5 SET @Sales = 10   WHILE @DayCount < 5000  BEGIN  INSERT Sale VALUES (@DayCount,@Sales)  SET @DayCount = @DayCount + 1  SET @Sales = @Sales + 15  END Next create a stored procedure to calculate the running total, and return a specified number of rows from the Sale table, using the following script: USE [CacheSample] GO   SET ANSI_NULLS ON GO   SET QUOTED_IDENTIFIER ON GO   -- ============================================= -- Author:        Robin -- Create date: -- Description:   -- ============================================= CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[spGetRunningTotals]       -- Add the parameters for the stored procedure here       @HighestDayCount smallint = null AS BEGIN       -- SET NOCOUNT ON added to prevent extra result sets from       -- interfering with SELECT statements.       SET NOCOUNT ON;         IF @HighestDayCount IS NULL             SELECT @HighestDayCount = MAX(DayCount) FROM dbo.Sale                   DECLARE @SaleTbl TABLE (DayCount smallint, Sales money, RunningTotal money)         DECLARE @DayCount smallint,                   @Sales money,                   @RunningTotal money         SET @RunningTotal = 0       SET @DayCount = 0         DECLARE rt_cursor CURSOR       FOR       SELECT DayCount, Sales       FROM Sale       ORDER BY DayCount         OPEN rt_cursor         FETCH NEXT FROM rt_cursor INTO @DayCount,@Sales         WHILE @@FETCH_STATUS = 0 AND @DayCount <= @HighestDayCount        BEGIN        SET @RunningTotal = @RunningTotal + @Sales        INSERT @SaleTbl VALUES (@DayCount,@Sales,@RunningTotal)        FETCH NEXT FROM rt_cursor INTO @DayCount,@Sales        END         CLOSE rt_cursor       DEALLOCATE rt_cursor         SELECT DayCount, Sales, RunningTotal       FROM @SaleTbl   END   GO   Create the Sample ASP.NET application In Visual Studio create a new solution and add a class library project called CacheSample.BusinessObjects and an ASP.NET web application called CacheSample.UI. The CacheSample.BusinessObjects project will contain a single class to represent a Sale data item, with all the code to retrieve the sales from the database included in it for simplicity (normally I would at least have a separate Repository or other object that is responsible for retrieving data, and probably a data access layer as well, but for this sample I want to keep it simple). The C# code for the Sale class is shown below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Data; using System.Data.SqlClient;   namespace CacheSample.BusinessObjects {     public class Sale     {         public Int16 DayCount { get; set; }         public decimal Sales { get; set; }         public decimal RunningTotal { get; set; }           public static IEnumerable<Sale> GetSales(int? highestDayCount)         {             List<Sale> sales = new List<Sale>();               SqlParameter highestDayCountParameter = new SqlParameter("@HighestDayCount", SqlDbType.SmallInt);             if (highestDayCount.HasValue)                 highestDayCountParameter.Value = highestDayCount;             else                 highestDayCountParameter.Value = DBNull.Value;               string connectionStr = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager .ConnectionStrings["CacheSample"].ConnectionString;               using(SqlConnection sqlConn = new SqlConnection(connectionStr))             using (SqlCommand sqlCmd = sqlConn.CreateCommand())             {                 sqlCmd.CommandText = "spGetRunningTotals";                 sqlCmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure;                 sqlCmd.Parameters.Add(highestDayCountParameter);                   sqlConn.Open();                   using (SqlDataReader dr = sqlCmd.ExecuteReader())                 {                     while (dr.Read())                     {                         Sale newSale = new Sale();                         newSale.DayCount = dr.GetInt16(0);                         newSale.Sales = dr.GetDecimal(1);                         newSale.RunningTotal = dr.GetDecimal(2);                           sales.Add(newSale);                     }                 }             }               return sales;         }     } }   The static GetSale() method makes a call to the spGetRunningTotals stored procedure and then reads each row from the returned SqlDataReader into an instance of the Sale class, it then returns a List of the Sale objects, as IEnnumerable<Sale>. A reference to System.Configuration needs to be added to the CacheSample.BusinessObjects project so that the connection string can be read from the web.config file. In the CacheSample.UI ASP.NET project, create a single web page called ShowSales.aspx, and make this the default start up page. This page will contain a single button to call the GetSales() method and a label to display the results. The html mark up and the C# code behind are shown below: ShowSales.aspx <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="ShowSales.aspx.cs" Inherits="CacheSample.UI.ShowSales" %>   <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">   <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head runat="server">     <title>Cache Sample - Show All Sales</title> </head> <body>     <form id="form1" runat="server">     <div>         <asp:Button ID="btnTest1" runat="server" onclick="btnTest1_Click"             Text="Get All Sales" />         &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;         <asp:Label ID="lblResults" runat="server"></asp:Label>         </div>     </form> </body> </html>   ShowSales.aspx.cs using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.UI; using System.Web.UI.WebControls;   using CacheSample.BusinessObjects;   namespace CacheSample.UI {     public partial class ShowSales : System.Web.UI.Page     {         protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e)         {         }           protected void btnTest1_Click(object sender, EventArgs e)         {             System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch stopWatch = new System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch();             stopWatch.Start();               var sales = Sale.GetSales(null);               var lastSales = sales.Last();               stopWatch.Stop();               lblResults.Text = string.Format( "Count of Sales: {0}, Last DayCount: {1}, Total Sales: {2}. Query took {3} ms", sales.Count(), lastSales.DayCount, lastSales.RunningTotal, stopWatch.ElapsedMilliseconds);         }       } }   Finally we need to add a connection string to the CacheSample SQL Server database, called CacheSample, to the web.config file: <?xmlversion="1.0"?>   <configuration>    <connectionStrings>     <addname="CacheSample"          connectionString="data source=.\SQLEXPRESS;Integrated Security=SSPI;Initial Catalog=CacheSample"          providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" />  </connectionStrings>    <system.web>     <compilationdebug="true"targetFramework="4.0" />  </system.web>   </configuration>   Run the application and click the button a few times to see how long each call to the database takes. On my system, each query takes about 450ms. Next I shall look at a solution to use the ASP.NET caching to cache the data returned by the query, so that subsequent requests to the GetSales() method are much faster. Adding Data Caching Support I am going to create my caching support in a separate project called CacheSample.Caching, so the next step is to add a class library to the solution. We shall be using the application configuration to define the implementation of our caching system, so we need a reference to System.Configuration adding to the project. ICacheProvider<T> Interface The first step in adding caching to our application is to define an interface, called ICacheProvider, in the CacheSample.Caching project, with methods to retrieve any data from the cache or to retrieve the data from the data source if it is not present in the cache. Dependency Injection will then be used to inject an implementation of this interface at runtime, allowing the users of the interface (i.e. the CacheSample.BusinessObjects project) to be completely unaware of how the caching is actually implemented. As data of any type maybe retrieved from the data source, it makes sense to use generics in the interface, with a generic type parameter defining the data type associated with a particular instance of the cache interface implementation. The C# code for the ICacheProvider interface is shown below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic;   namespace CacheSample.Caching {     public interface ICacheProvider     {     }       public interface ICacheProvider<T> : ICacheProvider     {         T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry);           IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry);     } }   The empty non-generic interface will be used as a type in a Dictionary generic collection later to store instances of the ICacheProvider<T> implementation for reuse, I prefer to use a base interface when doing this, as I think the alternative of using object makes for less clear code. The ICacheProvider<T> interface defines two overloaded Fetch methods, the difference between these is that one will return a single instance of the type T and the other will return an IEnumerable<T>, providing support for easy caching of collections of data items. Both methods will take a key parameter, which will uniquely identify the cached data, a delegate of type Func<T> or Func<IEnumerable<T>> which will provide the code to retrieve the data from the store if it is not present in the cache, and absolute or relative expiry policies to define when a cached item should expire. Note that at present there is no support for cache dependencies, but I shall be showing a method of adding this in part two of this article. CacheProviderFactory Class We need a mechanism of creating instances of our ICacheProvider<T> interface, using Dependency Injection to get the implementation of the interface. To do this we shall create a CacheProviderFactory static class in the CacheSample.Caching project. This factory will provide a generic static method called GetCacheProvider<T>(), which shall return instances of ICacheProvider<T>. We can then call this factory method with the relevant data type (for example the Sale class in the CacheSample.BusinessObject project) to get a instance of ICacheProvider for that type (e.g. call CacheProviderFactory.GetCacheProvider<Sale>() to get the ICacheProvider<Sale> implementation). The C# code for the CacheProviderFactory is shown below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic;   using CacheSample.Caching.Configuration;   namespace CacheSample.Caching {     public static class CacheProviderFactory     {         private static Dictionary<Type, ICacheProvider> cacheProviders = new Dictionary<Type, ICacheProvider>();         private static object syncRoot = new object();           ///<summary>         /// Factory method to create or retrieve an implementation of the  /// ICacheProvider interface for type <typeparamref name="T"/>.         ///</summary>         ///<typeparam name="T">  /// The type that this cache provider instance will work with  ///</typeparam>         ///<returns>An instance of the implementation of ICacheProvider for type  ///<typeparamref name="T"/>, as specified by the application  /// configuration</returns>         public static ICacheProvider<T> GetCacheProvider<T>()         {             ICacheProvider<T> cacheProvider = null;             // Get the Type reference for the type parameter T             Type typeOfT = typeof(T);               // Lock the access to the cacheProviders dictionary             // so multiple threads can work with it             lock (syncRoot)             {                 // First check if an instance of the ICacheProvider implementation  // already exists in the cacheProviders dictionary for the type T                 if (cacheProviders.ContainsKey(typeOfT))                     cacheProvider = (ICacheProvider<T>)cacheProviders[typeOfT];                 else                 {                     // There is not already an instance of the ICacheProvider in       // cacheProviders for the type T                     // so we need to create one                       // Get the Type reference for the application's implementation of       // ICacheProvider from the configuration                     Type cacheProviderType = Type.GetType(CacheProviderConfigurationSection.Current. CacheProviderType);                     if (cacheProviderType != null)                     {                         // Now get a Type reference for the Cache Provider with the                         // type T generic parameter                         Type typeOfCacheProviderTypeForT = cacheProviderType.MakeGenericType(new Type[] { typeOfT });                         if (typeOfCacheProviderTypeForT != null)                         {                             // Create the instance of the Cache Provider and add it to // the cacheProviders dictionary for future use                             cacheProvider = (ICacheProvider<T>)Activator. CreateInstance(typeOfCacheProviderTypeForT);                             cacheProviders.Add(typeOfT, cacheProvider);                         }                     }                 }             }               return cacheProvider;                 }     } }   As this code uses Activator.CreateInstance() to create instances of the ICacheProvider<T> implementation, which is a slow process, the factory class maintains a Dictionary of the previously created instances so that a cache provider needs to be created only once for each type. The type of the implementation of ICacheProvider<T> is read from a custom configuration section in the application configuration file, via the CacheProviderConfigurationSection class, which is described below. CacheProviderConfigurationSection Class The implementation of ICacheProvider<T> will be specified in a custom configuration section in the application’s configuration. To handle this create a folder in the CacheSample.Caching project called Configuration, and add a class called CacheProviderConfigurationSection to this folder. This class will extend the System.Configuration.ConfigurationSection class, and will contain a single string property called CacheProviderType. The C# code for this class is shown below: using System; using System.Configuration;   namespace CacheSample.Caching.Configuration {     internal class CacheProviderConfigurationSection : ConfigurationSection     {         public static CacheProviderConfigurationSection Current         {             get             {                 return (CacheProviderConfigurationSection) ConfigurationManager.GetSection("cacheProvider");             }         }           [ConfigurationProperty("type", IsRequired=true)]         public string CacheProviderType         {             get             {                 return (string)this["type"];             }         }     } }   Adding Data Caching to the Sales Class We now have enough code in place to add caching to the GetSales() method in the CacheSample.BusinessObjects.Sale class, even though we do not yet have an implementation of the ICacheProvider<T> interface. We need to add a reference to the CacheSample.Caching project to CacheSample.BusinessObjects so that we can use the ICacheProvider<T> interface within the GetSales() method. Once the reference is added, we can first create a unique string key based on the method name and the parameter value, so that the same cache key is used for repeated calls to the method with the same parameter values. Then we get an instance of the cache provider for the Sales type, using the CacheProviderFactory, and pass the existing code to retrieve the data from the database as the retrievalMethod delegate in a call to the Cache Provider Fetch() method. The C# code for the modified GetSales() method is shown below: public static IEnumerable<Sale> GetSales(int? highestDayCount) {     string cacheKey = string.Format("CacheSample.BusinessObjects.GetSalesWithCache({0})", highestDayCount);       return CacheSample.Caching.CacheProviderFactory. GetCacheProvider<Sale>().Fetch(cacheKey,         delegate()         {             List<Sale> sales = new List<Sale>();               SqlParameter highestDayCountParameter = new SqlParameter("@HighestDayCount", SqlDbType.SmallInt);             if (highestDayCount.HasValue)                 highestDayCountParameter.Value = highestDayCount;             else                 highestDayCountParameter.Value = DBNull.Value;               string connectionStr = System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager. ConnectionStrings["CacheSample"].ConnectionString;               using (SqlConnection sqlConn = new SqlConnection(connectionStr))             using (SqlCommand sqlCmd = sqlConn.CreateCommand())             {                 sqlCmd.CommandText = "spGetRunningTotals";                 sqlCmd.CommandType = CommandType.StoredProcedure;                 sqlCmd.Parameters.Add(highestDayCountParameter);                   sqlConn.Open();                   using (SqlDataReader dr = sqlCmd.ExecuteReader())                 {                     while (dr.Read())                     {                         Sale newSale = new Sale();                         newSale.DayCount = dr.GetInt16(0);                         newSale.Sales = dr.GetDecimal(1);                         newSale.RunningTotal = dr.GetDecimal(2);                           sales.Add(newSale);                     }                 }             }               return sales;         },         null,         new TimeSpan(0, 10, 0)); }     This example passes the code to retrieve the Sales data from the database to the Cache Provider as an anonymous method, however it could also be written as a lambda. The main advantage of using an anonymous function (method or lambda) is that the code inside the anonymous function can access the parameters passed to the GetSales() method. Finally the absolute expiry is set to null, and the relative expiry set to 10 minutes, to indicate that the cache entry should be removed 10 minutes after the last request for the data. As the ICacheProvider<T> has a Fetch() method that returns IEnumerable<T>, we can simply return the results of the Fetch() method to the caller of the GetSales() method. This should be all that is needed for the GetSales() method to now retrieve data from a cache after the first time the data has be retrieved from the database. Implementing a ASP.NET Cache Provider The final step is to actually implement the ICacheProvider<T> interface, and add the implementation details to the web.config file for the dependency injection. The cache provider implementation needs to have access to System.Web. Therefore it could be placed in the CacheSample.UI project, or in its own project that has a reference to System.Web. Implementing the Cache Provider in a separate project is my favoured approach. Create a new project inside the solution called CacheSample.CacheProvider, and add references to System.Web and CacheSample.Caching to this project. Add a class to the project called AspNetCacheProvider. Make the class a generic class by adding the generic parameter <T> and indicate that the class implements ICacheProvider<T>. The C# code for the AspNetCacheProvider class is shown below: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Caching;   using CacheSample.Caching;   namespace CacheSample.CacheProvider {     public class AspNetCacheProvider<T> : ICacheProvider<T>     {         #region ICacheProvider<T> Members           public T Fetch(string key, Func<T> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry)         {             return FetchAndCache<T>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry);         }           public IEnumerable<T> Fetch(string key, Func<IEnumerable<T>> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry)         {             return FetchAndCache<IEnumerable<T>>(key, retrieveData, absoluteExpiry, relativeExpiry);         }           #endregion           #region Helper Methods           private U FetchAndCache<U>(string key, Func<U> retrieveData, DateTime? absoluteExpiry, TimeSpan? relativeExpiry)         {             U value;             if (!TryGetValue<U>(key, out value))             {                 value = retrieveData();                 if (!absoluteExpiry.HasValue)                     absoluteExpiry = Cache.NoAbsoluteExpiration;                   if (!relativeExpiry.HasValue)                     relativeExpiry = Cache.NoSlidingExpiration;                   HttpContext.Current.Cache.Insert(key, value, null, absoluteExpiry.Value, relativeExpiry.Value);             }             return value;         }           private bool TryGetValue<U>(string key, out U value)         {             object cachedValue = HttpContext.Current.Cache.Get(key);             if (cachedValue == null)             {                 value = default(U);                 return false;             }             else             {                 try                 {                     value = (U)cachedValue;                     return true;                 }                 catch                 {                     value = default(U);                     return false;                 }             }         }           #endregion       } }   The two interface Fetch() methods call a private method called FetchAndCache(). This method first checks for a element in the HttpContext.Current.Cache with the specified cache key, and if so tries to cast this to the specified type (either T or IEnumerable<T>). If the cached element is found, the FetchAndCache() method simply returns it. If it is not found in the cache, the method calls the retrievalMethod delegate to get the data from the data source, and then adds this to the HttpContext.Current.Cache. The final step is to add the AspNetCacheProvider class to the relevant custom configuration section in the CacheSample.UI.Web.Config file. To do this there needs to be a <configSections> element added as the first element in <configuration>. This will match a custom section called <cacheProvider> with the CacheProviderConfigurationSection. Then we add a <cacheProvider> element, with a type property set to the fully qualified assembly name of the AspNetCacheProvider class, as shown below: <?xmlversion="1.0"?>   <configuration>  <configSections>     <sectionname="cacheProvider" type="CacheSample.Base.Configuration.CacheProviderConfigurationSection, CacheSample.Base" />  </configSections>    <connectionStrings>     <addname="CacheSample"          connectionString="data source=.\SQLEXPRESS;Integrated Security=SSPI;Initial Catalog=CacheSample"          providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" />  </connectionStrings>    <cacheProvidertype="CacheSample.CacheProvider.AspNetCacheProvider`1, CacheSample.CacheProvider, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null">  </cacheProvider>    <system.web>     <compilationdebug="true"targetFramework="4.0" />  </system.web>   </configuration>   One point to note is that the fully qualified assembly name of the AspNetCacheProvider class includes the notation `1 after the class name, which indicates that it is a generic class with a single generic type parameter. The CacheSample.UI project needs to have references added to CacheSample.Caching and CacheSample.CacheProvider so that the actual application is aware of the relevant cache provider implementation. Conclusion After implementing this solution, you should have a working cache provider mechanism, that will allow the middle and data access layers to implement caching support when retrieving data, without any knowledge of the actually caching implementation. If the UI is not ASP.NET based, if for example it is Winforms or WPF, the implementation of ICacheProvider<T> would be written around whatever technology is available. It could even be a standalone caching system that takes full responsibility for adding and removing items from a global store. The next part of this article will show how this caching mechanism may be extended to provide support for cache dependencies, such as the System.Web.Caching.SqlCacheDependency. Another possible extension would be to cache the cache provider implementations instead of storing them in a static Dictionary in the CacheProviderFactory. This would prevent a build up of seldom used cache providers in the application memory, as they could be removed from the cache if not used often enough, although in reality there are probably unlikely to be vast numbers of cache provider implementation instances, as most applications do not have a massive number of business object or model types.

    Read the article

  • Per-vertex position/normal and per-index texture coordinate

    - by Boreal
    In my game, I have a mesh with a vertex buffer and index buffer up and running. The vertex buffer stores a Vector3 for the position and a Vector2 for the UV coordinate for each vertex. The index buffer is a list of ushorts. It works well, but I want to be able to use 3 discrete texture coordinates per triangle. I assume I have to create another vertex buffer, but how do I even use it? Here is my vertex/index buffer creation code: // vertices is a Vertex[] // indices is a ushort[] // VertexDefs stores the vertex size (sizeof(float) * 5) // vertex data numVertices = vertices.Length; DataStream data = new DataStream(VertexDefs.size * numVertices, true, true); data.WriteRange<Vertex>(vertices); data.Position = 0; // vertex buffer parameters BufferDescription vbDesc = new BufferDescription() { BindFlags = BindFlags.VertexBuffer, CpuAccessFlags = CpuAccessFlags.None, OptionFlags = ResourceOptionFlags.None, SizeInBytes = VertexDefs.size * numVertices, StructureByteStride = VertexDefs.size, Usage = ResourceUsage.Default }; // create vertex buffer vertexBuffer = new Buffer(Graphics.device, data, vbDesc); vertexBufferBinding = new VertexBufferBinding(vertexBuffer, VertexDefs.size, 0); data.Dispose(); // index data numIndices = indices.Length; data = new DataStream(sizeof(ushort) * numIndices, true, true); data.WriteRange<ushort>(indices); data.Position = 0; // index buffer parameters BufferDescription ibDesc = new BufferDescription() { BindFlags = BindFlags.IndexBuffer, CpuAccessFlags = CpuAccessFlags.None, OptionFlags = ResourceOptionFlags.None, SizeInBytes = sizeof(ushort) * numIndices, StructureByteStride = sizeof(ushort), Usage = ResourceUsage.Default }; // create index buffer indexBuffer = new Buffer(Graphics.device, data, ibDesc); data.Dispose(); Engine.Log(MessageType.Success, string.Format("Mesh created with {0} vertices and {1} indices", numVertices, numIndices)); And my drawing code: // ShaderEffect, ShaderTechnique, and ShaderPass all store effect data // e is of type ShaderEffect // get the technique ShaderTechnique t; if(!e.techniques.TryGetValue(techniqueName, out t)) return; // effect variables e.SetMatrix("worldView", worldView); e.SetMatrix("projection", projection); e.SetResource("diffuseMap", texture); e.SetSampler("textureSampler", sampler); // set per-mesh/technique settings Graphics.context.InputAssembler.SetVertexBuffers(0, vertexBufferBinding); Graphics.context.InputAssembler.SetIndexBuffer(indexBuffer, SlimDX.DXGI.Format.R16_UInt, 0); Graphics.context.PixelShader.SetSampler(sampler, 0); // render for each pass foreach(ShaderPass p in t.passes) { Graphics.context.InputAssembler.InputLayout = p.layout; p.pass.Apply(Graphics.context); Graphics.context.DrawIndexed(numIndices, 0, 0); } How can I do this?

    Read the article

  • Lots of first chance Microsoft.CSharp.RuntimeBinderExceptions thrown when dealing with dynamics

    - by Orion Edwards
    I've got a standard 'dynamic dictionary' type class in C# - class Bucket : DynamicObject { readonly Dictionary<string, object> m_dict = new Dictionary<string, object>(); public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) { m_dict[binder.Name] = value; return true; } public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) { return m_dict.TryGetValue(binder.Name, out result); } } Now I call it, as follows: static void Main(string[] args) { dynamic d = new Bucket(); d.Name = "Orion"; // 2 RuntimeBinderExceptions Console.WriteLine(d.Name); // 2 RuntimeBinderExceptions } The app does what you'd expect it to, but the debug output looks like this: A first chance exception of type 'Microsoft.CSharp.RuntimeBinder.RuntimeBinderException' occurred in Microsoft.CSharp.dll A first chance exception of type 'Microsoft.CSharp.RuntimeBinder.RuntimeBinderException' occurred in Microsoft.CSharp.dll 'ScratchConsoleApplication.vshost.exe' (Managed (v4.0.30319)): Loaded 'Anonymously Hosted DynamicMethods Assembly' A first chance exception of type 'Microsoft.CSharp.RuntimeBinder.RuntimeBinderException' occurred in Microsoft.CSharp.dll A first chance exception of type 'Microsoft.CSharp.RuntimeBinder.RuntimeBinderException' occurred in Microsoft.CSharp.dll Any attempt to access a dynamic member seems to output a RuntimeBinderException to the debug logs. While I'm aware that first-chance exceptions are not a problem in and of themselves, this does cause some problems for me: I often have the debugger set to "break on exceptions", as I'm writing WPF apps, and otherwise all exceptions end up getting converted to a DispatcherUnhandledException, and all the actual information you want is lost. WPF sucks like that. As soon as I hit any code that's using dynamic, the debug output log becomes fairly useless. All the useful trace lines that I care about get hidden amongst all the useless RuntimeBinderExceptions Is there any way I can turn this off, or is the RuntimeBinder unfortunately just built like that? Thanks, Orion

    Read the article

  • asp.net MVC 1.0 and 2.0 currency model binding

    - by David Liddle
    I would like to create model binding functionality so a user can enter ',' '.' etc for currency values which bind to a double value of my ViewModel. I was able to do this in MVC 1.0 by creating a custom model binder, however since upgrading to MVC 2.0 this functionality no longer works. Does anyone have any ideas or better solutions for performing this functionality? A better solution would be to use some data annotation or custom attribute. public class MyViewModel { public double MyCurrencyValue { get; set; } } A preferred solution would be something like this... public class MyViewModel { [CurrencyAttribute] public double MyCurrencyValue { get; set; } } Below is my solution for model binding in MVC 1.0. public class MyCustomModelBinder : DefaultModelBinder { public override object BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) { object result = null; ValueProviderResult valueResult; bindingContext.ValueProvider.TryGetValue(bindingContext.ModelName, out valueResult); bindingContext.ModelState.SetModelValue(bindingContext.ModelName, valueResult); if (bindingContext.ModelType == typeof(double)) { string modelName = bindingContext.ModelName; string attemptedValue = bindingContext.ValueProvider[modelName].AttemptedValue; string wantedSeperator = NumberFormatInfo.CurrentInfo.NumberDecimalSeparator; string alternateSeperator = (wantedSeperator == "," ? "." : ","); try { result = double.Parse(attemptedValue, NumberStyles.Any); } catch (FormatException e) { bindingContext.ModelState.AddModelError(modelName, e); } } else { result = base.BindModel(controllerContext, bindingContext); } return result; } }

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC - Data Annotations - Why add a default RequiredAttribute?

    - by redsquare
    Can anyone explain why it is assumed that a non nullable type property should always have a RequiredAttribue? I am trying to write a label helper that will auto append * or change the css class so that I can indicate to the user that the field is required. However when querying the metadata the non nullable properties end up with a required attribute. MVC Source Code: protected override IEnumerable<ModelValidator> GetValidators( ModelMetadata metadata, ControllerContext context, IEnumerable<Attribute> attributes) { _adaptersLock.EnterReadLock(); try { List<ModelValidator> results = new List<ModelValidator>(); if (metadata.IsRequired && !attributes.Any(a => a is RequiredAttribute)) { //******* Why Do this? attributes = attributes.Concat(new[] { new RequiredAttribute() }); } foreach (ValidationAttribute attribute in attributes.OfType<ValidationAttribute>()) { DataAnnotationsModelValidationFactory factory; if (!_adapters.TryGetValue(attribute.GetType(), out factory)) factory = _defaultFactory; results.Add(factory(metadata, context, attribute)); } return results; } finally { _adaptersLock.ExitReadLock(); } }

    Read the article

  • Question about WeakReferences

    - by Impz0r
    Hey there, I've got a question regarding WeakReferences. I'm right now in the process of writing a "Resource Manager" who hast to keep references to created texture objects. I have a Dictionary like: Dictionary<uint, WeakReference> Where the first is, as you allready may guessed, the Resource Id and the second param is a WeakReference to the Resource itself. Right now my Resources do have a method to free themselfes from their Owner (i.e. Resource Manager). They do so in calling a method at the Resource Manger while passing a this reference to it. The ResMgr does lookup if it is a resource he keeps bookmark of and if so, does something like this: WeakReference result; if (m_Resources.TryGetValue(ResourceId, out result)) { if (result.IsAlive) return; (result.Target as Resource).free(); // free for good m_Resources.Remove(ResourceId); } The Problem I'm having is that the part after: if (result.IsAlive) is never reached because there are still leftover references to the Resource. The thing is, I do only have one Reference of the Resource in question and it releases itself like: resource.free(); // calls internally its owner (i.e. ResMgr) resource = null; I guess the left over reference would be the "resource" variable, but I cannot set it to null, because I do have to call free first. Quite a dilema... Well what I wanted to achive with this is a Resource Manager who keeps references to its owning Resources and release them ONLY if there is no reference left to not screw up something. Any idea how I may solve this in a clean fashion? Thanks in advance! Mfg Imp

    Read the article

  • What should the name of this class be?

    - by Tim Murphy
    Naming classes is sometimes hard. What do you think name of the class should be? I originally created the class to use as a cache but can see its may have other uses. Example code to use the class. Dim cache = New NamePendingDictionary(Of String, Sample) Dim value = cache("a", Function() New Sample()) And here is the class that needs a name. ''' <summary> ''' Enhancement of <see cref="System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary"/>. See the Item property ''' for more details. ''' </summary> ''' <typeparam name="TKey">The type of the keys in the dictionary.</typeparam> ''' <typeparam name="TValue">The type of the values in the dictionary.</typeparam> Public Class NamePendingDictionary(Of TKey, TValue) Inherits Dictionary(Of TKey, TValue) Delegate Function DefaultValue() As TValue ''' <summary> ''' Gets or sets the value associated with the specified key. If the specified key does not exist ''' then <paramref name="createDefaultValue"/> is invoked and added to the dictionary. The created ''' value is then returned. ''' </summary> ''' <param name="key">The key of the value to get.</param> ''' <param name="createDefaultValue"> ''' The delegate to invoke if <paramref name="key"/> does not exist in the dictionary. ''' </param> ''' <exception cref="T:System.ArgumentNullException"><paramref name="key" /> is null.</exception> Default Public Overloads ReadOnly Property Item(ByVal key As TKey, ByVal createDefaultValue As DefaultValue) As TValue Get Dim value As TValue If createDefaultValue Is Nothing Then Throw New ArgumentNullException("createValue") End If If Not Me.TryGetValue(key, value) Then value = createDefaultValue.Invoke() Me.Add(key, value) End If Return value End Get End Property End Class

    Read the article

  • Can I get rid of this read lock?

    - by Pieter
    I have the following helper class (simplified): public static class Cache { private static readonly object _syncRoot = new object(); private static Dictionary<Type, string> _lookup = new Dictionary<Type, string>(); public static void Add(Type type, string value) { lock (_syncRoot) { _lookup.Add(type, value); } } public static string Lookup(Type type) { string result; lock (_syncRoot) { _lookup.TryGetValue(type, out result); } return result; } } Add will be called roughly 10/100 times in the application and Lookup will be called by many threads, many of thousands of times. What I would like is to get rid of the read lock. How do you normally get rid of the read lock in this situation? I have the following ideas: Require that _lookup is stable before the application starts operation. The could be build up from an Attribute. This is done automatically through the static constructor the attribute is assigned to. Requiring the above would require me to go through all types that could have the attribute and calling RuntimeHelpers.RunClassConstructor which is an expensive operation; Move to COW semantics. public static void Add(Type type, string value) { lock (_syncRoot) { var lookup = new Dictionary<Type, string>(_lookup); lookup.Add(type, value); _lookup = lookup; } } (With the lock (_syncRoot) removed in the Lookup method.) The problem with this is that this uses an unnecessary amount of memory (which might not be a problem) and I would probably make _lookup volatile, but I'm not sure how this should be applied. (John Skeets' comment here gives me pause.) Using ReaderWriterLock. I believe this would make things worse since the region being locked is small. Suggestions are very welcome.

    Read the article

  • Tail recursion and memoization with C#

    - by Jay
    I'm writing a function that finds the full path of a directory based on a database table of entries. Each record contains a key, the directory's name, and the key of the parent directory (it's the Directory table in an MSI if you're familiar). I had an iterative solution, but it started looking a little nasty. I thought I could write an elegant tail recursive solution, but I'm not sure anymore. I'll show you my code and then explain the issues I'm facing. Dictionary<string, string> m_directoryKeyToFullPathDictionary = new Dictionary<string, string>(); ... private string ExpandDirectoryKey(Database database, string directoryKey) { // check for terminating condition string fullPath; if (m_directoryKeyToFullPathDictionary.TryGetValue(directoryKey, out fullPath)) { return fullPath; } // inductive step Record record = ExecuteQuery(database, "SELECT DefaultDir, Directory_Parent FROM Directory where Directory.Directory='{0}'", directoryKey); // null check string directoryName = record.GetString("DefaultDir"); string parentDirectoryKey = record.GetString("Directory_Parent"); return Path.Combine(ExpandDirectoryKey(database, parentDirectoryKey), directoryName); } This is how the code looked when I realized I had a problem (with some minor validation/massaging removed). I want to use memoization to short circuit whenever possible, but that requires me to make a function call to the dictionary to store the output of the recursive ExpandDirectoryKey call. I realize that I also have a Path.Combine call there, but I think that can be circumvented with a ... + Path.DirectorySeparatorChar + .... I thought about using a helper method that would memoize the directory and return the value so that I could call it like this at the end of the function above: return MemoizeHelper( m_directoryKeyToFullPathDictionary, Path.Combine(ExpandDirectoryKey(database, parentDirectoryKey)), directoryName); But I feel like that's cheating and not going to be optimized as tail recursion. Any ideas? Should I be using a completely different strategy? This doesn't need to be a super efficient algorithm at all, I'm just really curious. I'm using .NET 4.0, btw. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to specify generic method type parameters partly

    - by DNNX
    I have an extension method like below: public static T GetValueAs<T, R>(this IDictionary<string, R> dictionary, string fieldName) where T : R { R value; if (!dictionary.TryGetValue(fieldName, out value)) return default(T); return (T)value; } Currently, I can use it in the following way: var dictionary = new Dictionary<string, object(); //... var list = dictionary.GetValueAs<List<int, object("A"); // this may throw ClassCastException - this is expected behavior; It works pretty fine, but the second type parameter is really annoying. Is it possible in C# 4.0 rewrite GetValueAs is such a way that the method will still be applicable to different types of string-keyed dictionaries AND there will be no need to specify second type parameter in the calling code, i.e. use var list = dictionary.GetValueAs<List<int("A"); or at least something like var list = dictionary.GetValueAs<List<int, ?("A"); instead of var list = dictionary.GetValueAs<List<int, object("A");

    Read the article

  • Event Logging in LINQ C# .NET

    The first thing you'll want to do before using this code is to create a table in your database called TableHistory: CREATE TABLE [dbo].[TableHistory] (     [TableHistoryID] [int] IDENTITY NOT NULL ,     [TableName] [varchar] (50) NOT NULL ,     [Key1] [varchar] (50) NOT NULL ,     [Key2] [varchar] (50) NULL ,     [Key3] [varchar] (50) NULL ,     [Key4] [varchar] (50) NULL ,     [Key5] [varchar] (50) NULL ,     [Key6] [varchar] (50)NULL ,     [ActionType] [varchar] (50) NULL ,     [Property] [varchar] (50) NULL ,     [OldValue] [varchar] (8000) NULL ,     [NewValue] [varchar] (8000) NULL ,     [ActionUserName] [varchar] (50) NOT NULL ,     [ActionDateTime] [datetime] NOT NULL ) Once you have created the table, you'll need to add it to your custom LINQ class (which I will refer to as DboDataContext), thus creating the TableHistory class. Then, you'll need to add the History.cs file to your project. You'll also want to add the following code to your project to get the system date: public partial class DboDataContext{ [Function(Name = "GetDate", IsComposable = true)] public DateTime GetSystemDate() { MethodInfo mi = MethodBase.GetCurrentMethod() as MethodInfo; return (DateTime)this.ExecuteMethodCall(this, mi, new object[] { }).ReturnValue; }}private static Dictionary<type,> _cachedIL = new Dictionary<type,>();public static T CloneObjectWithIL<t>(T myObject){ Delegate myExec = null; if (!_cachedIL.TryGetValue(typeof(T), out myExec)) { // Create ILGenerator DynamicMethod dymMethod = new DynamicMethod("DoClone", typeof(T), new Type[] { typeof(T) }, true); ConstructorInfo cInfo = myObject.GetType().GetConstructor(new Type[] { }); ILGenerator generator = dymMethod.GetILGenerator(); LocalBuilder lbf = generator.DeclareLocal(typeof(T)); //lbf.SetLocalSymInfo("_temp"); generator.Emit(OpCodes.Newobj, cInfo); generator.Emit(OpCodes.Stloc_0); foreach (FieldInfo field in myObject.GetType().GetFields( System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Public | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic)) { // Load the new object on the eval stack... (currently 1 item on eval stack) generator.Emit(OpCodes.Ldloc_0); // Load initial object (parameter) (currently 2 items on eval stack) generator.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0); // Replace value by field value (still currently 2 items on eval stack) generator.Emit(OpCodes.Ldfld, field); // Store the value of the top on the eval stack into // the object underneath that value on the value stack. // (0 items on eval stack) generator.Emit(OpCodes.Stfld, field); } // Load new constructed obj on eval stack -> 1 item on stack generator.Emit(OpCodes.Ldloc_0); // Return constructed object. --> 0 items on stack generator.Emit(OpCodes.Ret); myExec = dymMethod.CreateDelegate(typeof(Func<t,>)); _cachedIL.Add(typeof(T), myExec); } return ((Func<t,>)myExec)(myObject);}I got both of the above methods off of the net somewhere (maybe even from CodeProject), but it's been long enough that I can't recall where I got them.Explanation of the History ClassThe History class records changes by creating a TableHistory record, inserting the values for the primary key for the table being modified into the Key1, Key2, ..., Key6 columns (if you have more than 6 values that make up a primary key on any table, you'll want to modify this), setting the type of change being made in the ActionType column (INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE), old value and new value if it happens to be an update action, and the date and Windows identity of the user who made the change.Let's examine what happens when a call is made to the RecordLinqInsert method:public static void RecordLinqInsert(DboDataContext dbo, IIdentity user, object obj){ TableHistory hist = NewHistoryRecord(obj); hist.ActionType = "INSERT"; hist.ActionUserName = user.Name; hist.ActionDateTime = dbo.GetSystemDate(); dbo.TableHistories.InsertOnSubmit(hist);}private static TableHistory NewHistoryRecord(object obj){ TableHistory hist = new TableHistory(); Type type = obj.GetType(); PropertyInfo[] keys; if (historyRecordExceptions.ContainsKey(type)) { keys = historyRecordExceptions[type].ToArray(); } else { keys = type.GetProperties().Where(o => AttrIsPrimaryKey(o)).ToArray(); } if (keys.Length > KeyMax) throw new HistoryException("object has more than " + KeyMax.ToString() + " keys."); for (int i = 1; i <= keys.Length; i++) { typeof(TableHistory) .GetProperty("Key" + i.ToString()) .SetValue(hist, keys[i - 1].GetValue(obj, null).ToString(), null); } hist.TableName = type.Name; return hist;}protected static bool AttrIsPrimaryKey(PropertyInfo pi){ var attrs = from attr in pi.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(ColumnAttribute), true) where ((ColumnAttribute)attr).IsPrimaryKey select attr; if (attrs != null && attrs.Count() > 0) return true; else return false;}RecordLinqInsert takes as input a data context which it will use to write to the database, the user, and the LINQ object to be recorded (a single object, for instance, a Customer or Order object if you're using AdventureWorks). It then calls the NewHistoryRecord method, which uses LINQ to Objects in conjunction with the AttrIsPrimaryKey method to pull all the primary key properties, set the Key1-KeyN properties of the TableHistory object, and return the new TableHistory object. The code would be called in an application, like so: Continue span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Understanding VS2010 C# parallel profiling results

    - by Haggai
    I have a program with many independent computations so I decided to parallelize it. I use Parallel.For/Each. The results were okay for a dual-core machine - CPU utilization of about 80%-90% most of the time. However, with a dual Xeon machine (i.e. 8 cores) I get only about 30%-40% CPU utilization, although the program spends quite a lot of time (sometimes more than 10 seconds) on the parallel sections, and I see it employs about 20-30 more threads in those sections compared to serial sections. Each thread takes more than 1 second to complete, so I see no reason for them to work in parallel - unless there is a synchronization problem. I used the built-in profiler of VS2010, and the results are strange. Even though I use locks only in one place, the profiler reports that about 85% of the program's time is spent on synchronization (also 5-7% sleep, 5-7% execution, under 1% IO). The locked code is only a cache (a dictionary) get/add: bool esn_found; lock (lock_load_esn) esn_found = cache.TryGetValue(st, out esn); if(!esn_found) { esn = pData.esa_inv_idx.esa[term_idx]; esn.populate(pData.esa_inv_idx.datafile); lock (lock_load_esn) { if (!cache.ContainsKey(st)) cache.Add(st, esn); } } lock_load_esn is a static member of the class of type Object. esn.populate reads from a file using a separate StreamReader for each thread. However, when I press the Synchronization button to see what causes the most delay, I see that the profiler reports lines which are function entrance lines, and doesn't report the locked sections themselves. It doesn't even report the function that contains the above code (reminder - the only lock in the program) as part of the blocking profile with noise level 2%. With noise level at 0% it reports all the functions of the program, which I don't understand why they count as blocking synchronizations. So my question is - what is going on here? How can it be that 85% of the time is spent on synchronization? How do I find out what really is the problem with the parallel sections of my program? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Dynamic Objects for ASPxGridview

    - by André Snede Hansen
    I have a dictionary that is populated with data from a table, we are doing this so we can hold multiple SQL tables inside this object. This approached cannot be discussed. The Dictionary is mapped as a , and contains SQL column name and the value, and each dictionary resembles one row entry in the Table. Now I need to display this on a editable gridview, preferably the ASPxGridView. I already figured out that I should use Dynamic Objects(C#), and everything worked perfectly, up to the part where I find out that the ASPxGridview is built in .NET 2.0 and not 4.0 where Dynamic objects where implemented, therefor I cannot use it... As you cannot, to my knowledge, add rows to the gridview programmatically, I am out of ideas, and seek your help guys! protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { UserValidationTableDataProvider uvtDataprovider = _DALFactory.getProvider<UserValidationTableDataProvider>(typeof(UserValidationTableEntry)); string[] tableNames = uvtDataprovider.TableNames; UserValidationTableEntry[] entries = uvtDataprovider.getAllrecordsFromTable(tableNames[0]); userValidtionTableGridView.Columns.Clear(); Dictionary<string, string> firstEntry = entries[0].Values; foreach (KeyValuePair<string, string> kvp in firstEntry) { userValidtionTableGridView.Columns.Add(new GridViewDataColumn(kvp.Key)); } var dynamicObjectList = new List<dynamic>(); foreach (UserValidationTableEntry uvt in entries) { //dynamic dynObject = new MyDynamicObject(uvt.Values); dynamicObjectList.Add(new MyDynamicObject(uvt.Values)); } } public class MyDynamicObject : DynamicObject { Dictionary<string, string> properties = new Dictionary<string, string>(); public MyDynamicObject(Dictionary<string, string> dictio) { properties = dictio; } // If you try to get a value of a property // not defined in the class, this method is called. public override bool TryGetMember(GetMemberBinder binder, out object result) { // Converting the property name to lowercase // so that property names become case-insensitive. string name = binder.Name.ToLower(); string RResult; // If the property name is found in a dictionary, // set the result parameter to the property value and return true. // Otherwise, return false. bool wasSuccesfull = properties.TryGetValue(name, out RResult); result = RResult; return wasSuccesfull; } // If you try to set a value of a property that is // not defined in the class, this method is called. public override bool TrySetMember(SetMemberBinder binder, object value) { // Converting the property name to lowercase // so that property names become case-insensitive. properties[binder.Name.ToLower()] = value.ToString(); // You can always add a value to a dictionary, // so this method always returns true. return true; } } Now, I am almost certain that his "Dynamic object" approach, is not the one I can go with from here on. I hope you guys can help me :)!

    Read the article

  • On Redirect - Failed to generate a user instance of SQL Server...

    - by Craig Russell
    Hello (this is a long post sorry), I am writing a application in ASP.NET MVC 2 and I have reached a point where I am receiving this error when I connect remotely to my Server. Failed to generate a user instance of SQL Server due to failure in retrieving the user's local application data path. Please make sure the user has a local user profile on the computer. The connection will be closed. I thought I had worked around this problem locally, as I was getting this error in debug when site was redirected to a baseUrl if a subdomain was invalid using this code: protected override void Initialize(RequestContext requestContext) { string[] host = requestContext.HttpContext.Request.Headers["Host"].Split(':'); _siteProvider.Initialise(host, LiveMeet.Properties.Settings.Default["baseUrl"].ToString()); base.Initialize(requestContext); } protected override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { if (Site == null) { string[] host = filterContext.HttpContext.Request.Headers["Host"].Split(':'); string newUrl; if (host.Length == 2) newUrl = "http://sample.local:" + host[1]; else newUrl = "http://sample.local"; Response.Redirect(newUrl, true); } ViewData["Site"] = Site; base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext); } public Site Site { get { return _siteProvider.GetCurrentSite(); } } The Site object is returned from a Provider named siteProvider, this does two checks, once against a database containing a list of all available subdomains, then if that fails to find a valid subdomain, or valid domain name, searches a memory cache of reserved domains, if that doesn't hit then returns a baseUrl where all invalid domains are redirected. locally this worked when I added the true to Response.Redirect, assuming a halting of the current execution and restarting the execution on the browser redirect. What I have found in the stack trace is that the error is thrown on the second attempt to access the database. #region ISiteProvider Members public void Initialise(string[] host, string basehost) { if (host[0].Contains(basehost)) host = host[0].Split('.'); Site getSite = GetSites().WithDomain(host[0]); if (getSite == null) { sites.TryGetValue(host[0], out getSite); } _site = getSite; } public Site GetCurrentSite() { return _site; } public IQueryable<Site> GetSites() { return from p in _repository.groupDomains select new Site { Host = p.domainName, GroupGuid = (Guid)p.groupGuid, IsSubDomain = p.isSubdomain }; } #endregion The Linq query ^^^ is hit first, with a filter of WithDomain, the error isn't thrown till the WithDomain filter is attempted. In summary: The error is hit after the page is redirected, so the first iteration is executing as expected (so permissions on the database are correct, user profiles etc) shortly after the redirect when it filters the database query for the possible domain/subdomain of current redirected page, it errors out.

    Read the article

  • Why does WebSharingAppDemo-CEProviderEndToEnd sample still need a client db connection after scope c

    - by Don
    I'm researching a way to build an n-tierd sync solution. From the WebSharingAppDemo-CEProviderEndToEnd sample it seems almost feasable however for some reason, the app will only sync if the client has a live SQL db connection. Can some one explain what I'm missing and how to sync without exposing SQL to the internet? The problem I'm experiencing is that when I provide a Relational sync provider that has an open SQL connection from the client, then it works fine but when I provide a Relational sync provider that has a closed but configured connection string, as in the example, I get an error from the WCF stating that the server did not receive the batch file. So what am I doing wrong? SqlConnectionStringBuilder builder = new SqlConnectionStringBuilder(); builder.DataSource = hostName; builder.IntegratedSecurity = true; builder.InitialCatalog = "mydbname"; builder.ConnectTimeout = 1; provider.Connection = new SqlConnection(builder.ToString()); // provider.Connection.Open(); **** un-commenting this causes the code to work** //create anew scope description and add the appropriate tables to this scope DbSyncScopeDescription scopeDesc = new DbSyncScopeDescription(SyncUtils.ScopeName); //class to be used to provision the scope defined above SqlSyncScopeProvisioning serverConfig = new SqlSyncScopeProvisioning(); .... The error I get occurs in this part of the WCF code: public SyncSessionStatistics ApplyChanges(ConflictResolutionPolicy resolutionPolicy, ChangeBatch sourceChanges, object changeData) { Log("ProcessChangeBatch: {0}", this.peerProvider.Connection.ConnectionString); DbSyncContext dataRetriever = changeData as DbSyncContext; if (dataRetriever != null && dataRetriever.IsDataBatched) { string remotePeerId = dataRetriever.MadeWithKnowledge.ReplicaId.ToString(); //Data is batched. The client should have uploaded this file to us prior to calling ApplyChanges. //So look for it. //The Id would be the DbSyncContext.BatchFileName which is just the batch file name without the complete path string localBatchFileName = null; if (!this.batchIdToFileMapper.TryGetValue(dataRetriever.BatchFileName, out localBatchFileName)) { //Service has not received this file. Throw exception throw new FaultException<WebSyncFaultException>(new WebSyncFaultException("No batch file uploaded for id " + dataRetriever.BatchFileName, null)); } dataRetriever.BatchFileName = localBatchFileName; } Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Converting generic type to it's base and vice-versa

    - by Pajci
    Can someone help me with the conversion I am facing in enclosed code ... I commented the lines of code, where I am having problem. Is this even the right way to achieve this ... what I am trying to do, is forward responses of specified type to provided callback. public class MessageBinder { private class Subscriber<T> : IEquatable<Subscriber<T>> where T : Response { ... } private readonly Dictionary<Type, List<Subscriber<Response>>> bindings; public MessageBinder() { this.bindings = new Dictionary<Type, List<Subscriber<Response>>>(); } public void Bind<TResponse>(short shortAddress, Action<ZigbeeAsyncResponse<TResponse>> callback) where TResponse : Response { List<Subscriber<TResponse>> subscribers = this.GetSubscribers<TResponse>(); if (subscribers != null) { subscribers.Add(new Subscriber<TResponse>(shortAddress, callback)); } else { var subscriber = new Subscriber<TResponse>(shortAddress, callback); // ERROR: cannot convert from 'List<Subscriber<TResponse>>' to 'List<Subscriber<Response>>' ... tried LINQ Cast operator - does not work either this.bindings.Add(typeof(TResponse), new List<Subscriber<TResponse>> { subscriber }); } } public void Forward<TResponse>(TResponse response) where TResponse : Response { var subscribers = this.GetSubscribers<TResponse>(); if (subscribers != null) { Subscriber<TResponse> subscriber; Type responseType = typeof (TResponse); if (responseType.IsSubclassOf(typeof (AFResponse))) { // ERROR: Cannot convert type 'TResponse' to 'AFResponse' ... tried cast to object first, works, but is this the right way? var afResponse = (AFResponse)response; subscriber = subscribers.SingleOrDefault(s => s.ShortAddress == afResponse.ShortAddress); } else { subscriber = subscribers.First(); } if (subscriber != null) { subscriber.Forward(response); } } } private List<Subscriber<TResponse>> GetSubscribers<TResponse>() where TResponse : Response { List<Subscriber<Response>> subscribers; this.bindings.TryGetValue(typeof(TResponse), out subscribers); // ERROR: How can I cast List<Subscriber<Response>> to List<Subscriber<TResponse>>? return subscribers; } } Thank you for any help :)

    Read the article

  • Optimizing sparse dot-product in C#

    - by Haggai
    Hello. I'm trying to calculate the dot-product of two very sparse associative arrays. The arrays contain an ID and a value, so the calculation should be done only on those IDs that are common to both arrays, e.g. <(1, 0.5), (3, 0.7), (12, 1.3) * <(2, 0.4), (3, 2.3), (12, 4.7) = 0.7*2.3 + 1.3*4.7 . My implementation (call it dict) currently uses Dictionaries, but it is too slow to my taste. double dot_product(IDictionary<int, double> arr1, IDictionary<int, double> arr2) { double res = 0; double val2; foreach (KeyValuePair<int, double> p in arr1) if (arr2.TryGetValue(p.Key, out val2)) res += p.Value * val2; return res; } The full arrays have about 500,000 entries each, while the sparse ones are only tens to hundreds entries each. I did some experiments with toy versions of dot products. First I tried to multiply just two double arrays to see the ultimate speed I can get (let's call this "flat"). Then I tried to change the implementation of the associative array multiplication using an int[] ID array and a double[] values array, walking together on both ID arrays and multiplying when they are equal (let's call this "double"). I then tried to run all three versions with debug or release, with F5 or Ctrl-F5. The results are as follows: debug F5: dict: 5.29s double: 4.18s (79% of dict) flat: 0.99s (19% of dict, 24% of double) debug ^F5: dict: 5.23s double: 4.19s (80% of dict) flat: 0.98s (19% of dict, 23% of double) release F5: dict: 5.29s double: 3.08s (58% of dict) flat: 0.81s (15% of dict, 26% of double) release ^F5: dict: 4.62s double: 1.22s (26% of dict) flat: 0.29s ( 6% of dict, 24% of double) I don't understand these results. Why isn't the dictionary version optimized in release F5 as do the double and flat versions? Why is it only slightly optimized in the release ^F5 version while the other two are heavily optimized? Also, since converting my code into the "double" scheme would mean lots of work - do you have any suggestions how to optimize the dictionary one? Thanks! Haggai

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3  | Next Page >