[olmo]

It's funny how async/await has influenced so many other languages but LINQ, that in my opinion is much more interesting (specially the DB stuff) for solving down to earth problems is sistematically ignored by other languages (Python, Java, JavaScript, etc...)

[louthy]

I guess you can argue that Haskell's do notation is exactly what LINQ (the grammar) is. F#'s computation expressions is a super-charged LINQ also.

I would like to see C#'s LINQ get an update. It seems to have been left to rot since Eric Meijer left the team. It doesn't even support the new values tuples where it's been fitted to every other part of the language:

    from (x,y) in Some((1,2))   // (x,y) will error
    select x + y;

The from x in y, let x = y, where x, select x, and, join x in y on a equals b, could and should be extended. Even better would be to allow custom operators like F#'s computation expressions.

[pbz]

To be fair, that feature is in the next version of C#; not release yet.

[moomin]

For me, LINQ is fundamentally list comprehensions on steroids. Way better than Pythons, about the same as using list functions in Haskell or F#, Java's finally caught up with its stream library.

The LINQ to SQL stuff annoys me, because while it works, it's a painful disaster to implement yourself against your own data stores. Believe me, I've tried.

[amyjess]

In the case of Python and Java, I think it's because generator expressions and Streams, respectively, accomplish much the same thing.

Honestly, if you've seen what LINQ compiles to, it looks an awful lot like a Java 8 Stream.

Using Wikipedia's example of LINQ translation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_Integrated_Query#Lang...):

Written LINQ is:

    var results = from c in SomeCollection
                  where c.SomeProperty < 10
                  select new {c.SomeProperty, c.OtherProperty};

It compiles to:

    var results =
         SomeCollection
            .Where(c => c.SomeProperty < 10)
            .Select(c => new {c.SomeProperty, c.OtherProperty});

And in Java 8:

    Stream<> results = someCollection.stream()
                                     .filter(c -> c.getSomeProperty() < 10)
                                     .map(c -> new AbstractMap.SimpleEntry<>(c.getSomeProperty(), c.getOtherProperty()));

(of course, iterating over them is different; you just use a for loop in C#, but in Java you have to either use .forEach() or .collect() to a collection and then for over that)

I think Streams have more LINQ in them than most people think.

Disclaimer: it's been about a year since I've written Java 8, and this is off the top of my head (and the last time I used it, my employer's codebase had a class for pairs that was better than just SimpleEntry), so the code could be wrong.

Edit: and just for completeness... the same in Python generator expressions:

    results = ((c.some_property, c.other_property)
               for c in some_collection
               if c.some_property < 10)

Not very LINQ-like, but it serves the same purpose.

[louthy]

The thing you're missing is the way that LINQ creates an anonymous type, which is used to close over the values in the expression:

    var results = from a in x
                  from b in y
                  from c in z
                  select a * b * c;

Is very much more attractive than:

    var results = x.SelectMany(a => y.SelectMany(b => z.Select(c => a * b * c)));

If you use LINQ for more than just SQL queries (for monadic types like Option, Either, etc.) then these types of expression are commonplace. I'd certainly rather use C#'s LINQ grammar over its fluent API.

[hokkos]

What you miss is that with LINQ you can extract the expression tree : https://msdn.microsoft.com/fr-fr/library/mt654263.aspx This is what is used to generate the SQL.

[rjbwork]

In the real world, MOST people are using the "it compiles to" version directly in the code. I certainly don't write the "from x in y select" version, except in the case of multiple hairy joins. Even those have become second nature at this point.

It's just more readable, and turns it into an object pipeline/functional programming style instead. The Java 8 streams were pretty much directly taken from LINQ and given their traditional functional names.

[amyjess]

> The Java 8 streams were pretty much directly taken from LINQ and given their traditional functional names.

That was my point. I was disagreeing with olmo's suggestion that Java "systematically ignored" LINQ.

[rjbwork]

Ah okay, I misunderstood. Indeed.

[louthy]

> In the real world, MOST people are using the "it compiles to" version directly in the code

What's your source for this claim? Because anecdotally I don't see that at all.

[gregmac]

Our codebase at work has hundreds if not thousands of LINQ queries, mostly using method syntax. I generally prefer it over query syntax except in a few cases, such when there's multiple joins or subqueries, or the when the statement is more than a few dozen lines. Occasionally a very complex LINQ statement requires using a `let` declaration which also is easier with query syntax. Luckily Resharper has an action to convert back and forth on the fly, so it's easy to use that to switch over when necessary.

I also don't use LINQ to SQL at all. It's all on in-memory stuff. I pretty much never write code like this:

    var result = new List<string>();
    foreach (var item in input) 
    {
        result.Add(item.Value);
    }
    return result; 

instead, using LINQ:

    return items.Select(x => x.Value);

The real power comes when you start mixing conditions:

    return items
        .Where(x => IsValidKey(x.Key))
        .Select(x => x.Value);

Or doing quick checks:

   if (items.Any(x => x == null || x.SomeValue == null)) 
       throw new InvalidArgumentException(nameof(items));

[rjbwork]

And now, with C#6 that last bit becomes:

if(items.Any(x => x?.SomeValue == null))

[alkonaut]

I think it depends on what the Linq to is. I find the sql like proper linq form only natural when databases are involved (and just barely).

Most uses of where/order/select in C# I'm pretty sure is linq to objects, not sql. I very rarely see the linq proper form in any C# code neither in OSS or in my dat job.

[douche]

I never use the query syntax, or ever see it in any of the books or blogs I read, to the point that it threw me for a loop a little bit when I was studying for the C# certification exam, to see how emphasized it was. I learned that style long ago when I first started, but the fluent, extension method style is easier and less ugly, IMO, particularly when you start getting into more complex queries, or LINQ-to-SQL, where you end up wrapping your multi-line LINQ query in parentheses and materializing it by calling ToList() or ToDictionary() at the end.

[rjbwork]

https://blog.oz-code.com/analyzing-github-linq-usage-the-res...

Closest thing we have to real data, but it's been my experience in OSS and in professional life.

[shitgoose]

.net lambdas are in my opinion cleaner than linq syntax. java 8 implemented lambdas following .net success.

[alkonaut]

Linq is used pretty loosely to include also the equivalent form so

    dogs
       .Select(d => d.Id)
       .Where(d => d.Age > 3)
       .Skip(4)
       .Take(2)

would be considered just as much "linq" by most c# devs even though this isn't the query language integrated - simply because it's the same exact thing as the regular linq code.

I too find the "real" linq form mostly distracting.

[douche]

The weird SQL-ish query syntax is an abomination. But using the LINQ extension methods, making use of lambdas as you say, is gold.

Most of it boils down to plain old functional map/fold/filter/zip constructs under different names.

[ConnorLeet]

Array.reduce(), Array.filter(), Array.map(), in JavaScript are pretty LINQ-ish if you ask me!

[MichaelGG]

The thing with LINQ is that it can represent itself (reified or 'quoted code), so you can transform it into SQL, GPU instructions, whatever. This isn't a new idea, and F# had it before C# did (and LISP had it before, and others).

map/filter/reduce are just basic functional programming elements.

[nightski]

They are nothing even remotely likely linq. Those functions return the resulting arrays. Linq expressions are not executed until enumerated.

This allows you to compose linq expressions without computing intermediate results.

[amyjess]

Sounds like Java 8 Streams, then.

Streams bear a pretty strong resemblance to translated LINQ.