If you do decide you need a comparer, you dirilik certainly use a generalized comparer (see DMenT's answer), but if you need to reuse that logic you should encapsulate it in a dedicated class. You could even declare it by inheriting from the generic base:
The inclusion of your comparison class (or more specifically the AsEnumerable call you needed to use to get it to work) meant that the sorting logic went from being based on the database server to being on the database client (your application).
int’ e cast ederek bizim yürekin anlamlı bir numerik bileğerlere ulaşabiliriz. Yalnızca numerik şayan de bileğil şayet ki Day tipini kod içinde kullanırsak bizlere elan geniş suples katkısızlayabilme potansiyiline sahiptir.
CodeFuller's answer will work fine, but birli an alternative option, you could use MoreLINQ and its DistinctBy method, which would avoid you needing to create a separate class at all:
The first is the idea of precise equality. Given two references to objects, do the two references point to the same location in memory? Programming languages are suited for this kind of comparison, and .Kemiksiz comes with many prebuilt operators to handle this case.
Since IEqualityComparer is contravariant in the type T, you dirilik use the base class comparer with distinct if you specify the generic parameter to C# IEqualityComparer nerelerde kullanılıyor Distinct:
It is essentially the same for this purpose with one subtle difference. In your first example you override Equals using a parameter of type Object and then have to cast it to Customer, however, in your second example you are able to have the parameter of type Customer which means there is no need to cast.
According to the IEqualityComparer code example provided by microsoft, you will want to use the new keyword (so hiding C# IEqualityComparer Nasıl Kullanılır the Equals implementation of the object) for implementing Equals.
What US checks and balances prevent the FBI from raiding politicians unfavorable to the federal government?
Eric's answer explains the root cause of the whole C# IEqualityComparer Kullanımı issue (in terms of covariance and contravariance).
recordが利用可能なケースではできるだけrecord型で定義するようにしましょう。
One feature I wish .Safi had which would improve the usefulness of such dictionaries would be a means of requesting C# IEqualityComparer nerelerde kullanılıyor the actual key object associated with a given key (so if the dictionary contained the string "WowZo" bey a key, one could look up "wowzo" and get "WowZo"; unfortunately, the only way to C# IEqualityComparer Temel Özellikleri ve Kullanımı retrieve an actual key object, if TValue doesn't contain a redundant reference to it, is to enumerate the entire collection).
It looks like you're forgetting the immutable nature of IEnumerable. None of the LINQ methods actually change the original variable.
making the lambda expression optional in the constructor so that full object equality emanet be checked by default, hamiş just on one of the properties.