I have:-
IEnumerable> items;
and I\'d like to create:-
IEnumerable> r
It's reasonably straightforward to do if you can guarantee how the results are going to be used. However, if the results might be used in an arbitrary order, you may need to buffer everything. Consider this:
var results = MethodToBeImplemented(sequences);
var iterator = results.GetEnumerator();
iterator.MoveNext();
var first = iterator.Current;
iterator.MoveNext();
var second = iterator.Current;
foreach (var x in second)
{
// Do something
}
foreach (var x in first)
{
// Do something
}
In order to get at the items in "second" you'll have to iterate over all of the subsequences, past the first items. If you then want it to be valid to iterate over the items in first
you either need to remember the items or be prepared to re-evaluate the subsequences.
Likewise you'll either need to buffer the subsequences as IEnumerable<T>
values or reread the whole lot each time.
Basically it's a whole can of worms which is difficult to do elegantly in a way which will work pleasantly for all situations :( If you have a specific situation in mind with appropriate constraints, we may be able to help more.
What about this?
List<string[]> items = new List<string[]>()
{
new string[] { "a", "b", "c" },
new string[] { "1", "2", "3" },
new string[] { "x", "y" },
new string[] { "y", "z", "w" }
};
var x = from i in Enumerable.Range(0, items.Max(a => a.Length))
select from z in items
where z.Length > i
select z[i];
You could compose existing operators like this,
IEnumerable<IEnumerable<int>> myInts = new List<IEnumerable<int>>()
{
Enumerable.Range(1, 20).ToList(),
Enumerable.Range(21, 5).ToList(),
Enumerable.Range(26, 15).ToList()
};
myInts.SelectMany(item => item.Select((number, index) => Tuple.Create(index, number)))
.GroupBy(item => item.Item1)
.Select(group => group.Select(tuple => tuple.Item2));
Here's one that is a bit shorter, but no doubt less efficient:
Enumerable.Range(0,items.Select(x => x.Count()).Max())
.Select(x => items.SelectMany(y => y.Skip(x).Take(1)));
Based on David B's answer, this code should perform better:
public static IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> JaggedPivot<T>(
this IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> source)
{
var originalEnumerators = source.Select(x => x.GetEnumerator()).ToList();
try
{
var enumerators =
new List<IEnumerator<T>>(originalEnumerators.Where(x => x.MoveNext()));
while (enumerators.Any())
{
yield return enumerators.Select(x => x.Current).ToList();
enumerators.RemoveAll(x => !x.MoveNext());
}
}
finally
{
originalEnumerators.ForEach(x => x.Dispose());
}
}
The difference is that the enumerators variable isn't re-created all the time.
Now lightly tested and with working disposal.
public static class Extensions
{
public static IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> JaggedPivot<T>(
this IEnumerable<IEnumerable<T>> source)
{
List<IEnumerator<T>> originalEnumerators = source
.Select(x => x.GetEnumerator())
.ToList();
try
{
List<IEnumerator<T>> enumerators = originalEnumerators
.Where(x => x.MoveNext()).ToList();
while (enumerators.Any())
{
List<T> result = enumerators.Select(x => x.Current).ToList();
yield return result;
enumerators = enumerators.Where(x => x.MoveNext()).ToList();
}
}
finally
{
originalEnumerators.ForEach(x => x.Dispose());
}
}
}
public class TestExtensions
{
public void Test1()
{
IEnumerable<IEnumerable<int>> myInts = new List<IEnumerable<int>>()
{
Enumerable.Range(1, 20).ToList(),
Enumerable.Range(21, 5).ToList(),
Enumerable.Range(26, 15).ToList()
};
foreach(IEnumerable<int> x in myInts.JaggedPivot().Take(10))
{
foreach(int i in x)
{
Console.Write("{0} ", i);
}
Console.WriteLine();
}
}
}