Check out my new course Learn you some Lambda best practice for great good! and learn the best practices for performance, cost, security, resilience, observability and scalability.
As great as LINQ is and how it has transformed the way we interact with data in .Net to the point many of us wonder how we had managed without it all this time! There are however, some pitfalls one can fall into, especially with the concept of delayed execution which is easily the most misunderstood aspect of LINQ.
Despite feeling pretty competent at LINQ and having grasped a decent understanding of how delay execution works, I still find myself making the odd mistakes which resulted in bugs that are hard to detect as they don’t tend to fail very loudly. So as a reminder to myself and anyone who’s had similar experience with these WTF bugs, here’s some pitfalls to look out for.
Before we start, here’s a simple Person class which we will reuse over and over:
Exhibit 1 – modifying items in an IEnumerable
As you’re passing IEnumerable objects around in your code, adding projection to projections, this might be a pattern which you have witnessed before:
Any guess on the output of the ExhibitOne method?
Not what you were expecting?
What had happened here is that the loops in both ExhibitOne and SetAge use a projection (from string to Person object) of the names array, a projection that is evaluated and its items fetched at the point when it’s actually needed. As a result, both loops loop through a new set of Person objects created by this line:
hence why the work SetAge had done is not reflected in the ExhibitOne method.
The fix here is simple, simply ‘materialize’ the Person objects in the InitializePersons method before passing them onto the SetAge method so that when you modify the Person objects in the array you’re modifying the same objects that will be passed back to the ExhibitOne method:
Whilst this will generate the expected result IF the persons parameter passed to the SetAge method is an array or list of some sort, it does leave room for things to go wrong and when they do it’s a pain to debug as the defect might manifest itself in all kinds of strange ways.
Therefore I would strongly suggest that anytime you find yourself iterating through an IEnumerable collection and modifying its elements you should substitute the IEnumerable type with either an array or list.
Exhibit 2 – dangerous overloads
As you’re building libraries it’s often useful to provide overloads to cater for single item as well as collections, for example:
WTF? Yes I hear you, but C#’s overload resolution algorithm determines that Person and List<Person> are better matched to T than IEnumerable<T> in these cases because no implicit casting is required (which the IEnumerable<T> overload does in order to make them match IEnumerable<Person>).
Alternatively, if you were to add further overloads for array and lists:
then the right methods will be called:
The obvious downside here is that you need to provide an overload for EVERY collection type which is far from ideal!
Obviously, to expect the callers to always remember to case their collection as an enumerable is unrealistic, in my opinion, it’s always better to leave as little room for confusion as possible and therefore the approach I’d recommend is:
- rename the methods so that it’s clear to the caller which method they should be calling, i.e.
Exhibit 3 – Enumerable.Except returns distinct items
I have already covered this topic earlier, read more about it here.
One to remember, Enumerable.Except performs a set operation and a set by definition contains only distinct items, just keep this simple rule in mind next time you use it.
Exhibit 4 – Do you know your T from your object?
This one should be rare, but interestingly nonetheless:
What do you think this code prints? Object or Person? The answer is … Object!
How is it that typeof(T) returns Object instead of Person? The reason is simple actually, it’s because items.ToList() returns List<object> as the compile time time of items is IEnumerable<object> instead of IEnumerable<Person>.
Turn FirstMethod into a generic method and everything will flow naturally:
I specialise in rapidly transitioning teams to serverless and building production-ready services on AWS.
Are you struggling with serverless or need guidance on best practices? Do you want someone to review your architecture and help you avoid costly mistakes down the line? Whatever the case, I’m here to help.
Check out my new course, Learn you some Lambda best practice for great good! In this course, you will learn best practices for working with AWS Lambda in terms of performance, cost, security, scalability, resilience and observability. Enrol now and enjoy a special preorder price of £9.99 (~$13).
Are you working with Serverless and looking for expert training to level-up your skills? Or are you looking for a solid foundation to start from? Look no further, register for my Production-Ready Serverless workshop to learn how to build production-grade Serverless applications!
Here is a complete list of all my posts on serverless and AWS Lambda. In the meantime, here are a few of my most popular blog posts.
- Lambda optimization tip – enable HTTP keep-alive
- You are thinking about serverless costs all wrong
- Many faced threats to Serverless security
- We can do better than percentile latencies
- I’m afraid you’re thinking about AWS Lambda cold starts all wrong
- Yubl’s road to Serverless
- AWS Lambda – should you have few monolithic functions or many single-purposed functions?
- AWS Lambda – compare coldstart time with different languages, memory and code sizes
- Guys, we’re doing pagination wrong