4 ms·

I spend most of my time in C# and it's always a sad moment when I start typing .Where(x => ...) in another language and realize it doesn't exist.

frou_dh 12y ago
It's spelled filter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_%28higher-order_function%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_%28higher-order_function...
- untog 12y ago
  I don't mind C# not using that name because .Where doesn't actually filter the object, it returns an IQueryable, which you can chain further statements onto, then filter.
  - DennisP 12y ago
    That's basically what filter does in Clojure (and probably any other language with lazy evaluation): http://debasishg.blogspot.com/2010/05/laziness-in-clojure-some-thoughts.html http://debasishg.blogspot.com/2010/05/laziness-in-clojure-so...
- _random_ 12y ago
  Nah, it's spelled Select: http://www.w3schools.com/sql/sql_where.asp http://www.w3schools.com/sql/sql_where.asp (but academics like non-human-friendly terms, sure)
  - frou_dh 12y ago
    No idea what point you're trying to make. On human-friendliness, filter can read as a physical metaphor, so scores rather well. Just need to remember whether what's caught is kept or discarded.
  - seanmcdirmid 12y ago
    No. Select == Map Where == Filter SelectMany == FlatMap Aggregate == FoldL
- taco_emoji 12y ago
  Not sure why this is getting downvoted, that's what it's called in most other languages.
- antics 12y ago
  The LINQ API is modeled after relational algebra (where `Select` acts as projection, and `Where` acts as selection, etc.), which is as good a basis for operations on collections as anything. It is not even clear that other popular names have precedent, let alone especially useful expressive power beyond what normal relational algebras afford. Besides that, one of the early intents behind LINQ was to allow a language-integrated ORM, so LINQ's choices for names are actually extremely appropriate.
  - frou_dh 12y ago
    The comment replied to was about missing its like in other languages. Didn't mean to imply that its name should be changed in C#.
dingleberry1j 12y ago
Even c++ has lambdas now... what's the big deal again?

frou_dh 12y ago

It's spelled filter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_%28higher-order_function%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_%28higher-order_function...

untog 12y ago
I don't mind C# not using that name because .Where doesn't actually filter the object, it returns an IQueryable, which you can chain further statements onto, then filter.
- DennisP 12y ago
  That's basically what filter does in Clojure (and probably any other language with lazy evaluation): http://debasishg.blogspot.com/2010/05/laziness-in-clojure-some-thoughts.html http://debasishg.blogspot.com/2010/05/laziness-in-clojure-so...
_random_ 12y ago
Nah, it's spelled Select: http://www.w3schools.com/sql/sql_where.asp http://www.w3schools.com/sql/sql_where.asp (but academics like non-human-friendly terms, sure)
- frou_dh 12y ago
  No idea what point you're trying to make. On human-friendliness, filter can read as a physical metaphor, so scores rather well. Just need to remember whether what's caught is kept or discarded.
- seanmcdirmid 12y ago
  No. Select == Map Where == Filter SelectMany == FlatMap Aggregate == FoldL
taco_emoji 12y ago
Not sure why this is getting downvoted, that's what it's called in most other languages.
antics 12y ago
The LINQ API is modeled after relational algebra (where `Select` acts as projection, and `Where` acts as selection, etc.), which is as good a basis for operations on collections as anything. It is not even clear that other popular names have precedent, let alone especially useful expressive power beyond what normal relational algebras afford. Besides that, one of the early intents behind LINQ was to allow a language-integrated ORM, so LINQ's choices for names are actually extremely appropriate.
- frou_dh 12y ago
  The comment replied to was about missing its like in other languages. Didn't mean to imply that its name should be changed in C#.

dingleberry1j 12y ago

Even c++ has lambdas now... what's the big deal again?