Ayende @ Rahien

It's a girl

Ugly Linq

One of the things that always bothered me with Linq was that it is actually not an interesting idea from the compiler perspective. I just had to implement a very simple expression to expression tree converter, which only served to strengthen my opinion. Here is the (ugly, proof of concept, horrible) implementation, using the Boo AST:

private static Block Linqify(Expression expr)
{
	var block = new Block(expr.LexicalInfo);
	ReferenceExpression condition = AddCondition(block);
	Parse(block, condition, expr);
	block.Add(new ReturnStatement(condition));
	return block;
}

private static ReferenceExpression AddCondition(Block block)
{
	var condition = new MethodInvocationExpression(new ReferenceExpression("Condition"));
	var expression = new ReferenceExpression("condition_" + CompilerContext.Current.AllocIndex());
	block.Add(
		new BinaryExpression(
			BinaryOperatorType.Assign,
			expression,
			condition)
		);
	return expression;
}

private static void Parse(Block block, Expression condition, Expression expr)
{
	var be = expr as BinaryExpression;
	if (be != null && (be.Operator == BinaryOperatorType.Or || be.Operator == BinaryOperatorType.And))
	{
		block.Add(new BinaryExpression(
			BinaryOperatorType.Assign,
			new MemberReferenceExpression(condition, "Operator"),
			new StringLiteralExpression(be.Operator.ToString().ToLowerInvariant()))
			);
		ReferenceExpression left = AddCondition(block);
		block.Add(
			new MethodInvocationExpression(
				new MemberReferenceExpression(new MemberReferenceExpression(condition, "Expressions"), "Add"), left));
		ReferenceExpression right = AddCondition(block);
		block.Add(
			new MethodInvocationExpression(
				new MemberReferenceExpression(new MemberReferenceExpression(condition, "Expressions"), "Add"), right));
		Parse(block, left, be.Left);
		Parse(block, right, be.Right);
		return;
	}
	var fragment = new MethodInvocationExpression(new ReferenceExpression("Fragment"));
	if (expr is UnaryExpression)
	{
		fragment.NamedArguments.Add(
			new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Modifier"),
				new StringLiteralExpression("not"))
			);
		be = (BinaryExpression)((UnaryExpression)expr).Operand;
	}
	var func1 = (MethodInvocationExpression)be.Left;
	fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Func1"), new StringLiteralExpression(func1.Target.ToString())));
	fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Prop1"), GetStringArgument(func1.Arguments[0])));
	var func2 = be.Right as MethodInvocationExpression;
	if (func2 != null)
	{
		fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Func2"), new StringLiteralExpression(func2.Target.ToString())));
		fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Prop2"), GetStringArgument(func2.Arguments[0])));
	}
	else
	{
		fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Func2"), new StringLiteralExpression("literal")));
		fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Prop2"), GetStringArgument(be.Right)));
	}
	fragment.NamedArguments.Add(new ExpressionPair(new ReferenceExpression("Operator"),
		new StringLiteralExpression(GetOperator(be))));

	block.Add(
		new MethodInvocationExpression(
			new MemberReferenceExpression(new MemberReferenceExpression(condition, "Expressions"), "Add"), fragment));

}

private static Expression GetStringArgument(Expression expr)
{
	if (expr is StringLiteralExpression)
		return expr;
	return new StringLiteralExpression(expr.ToString());
}

private static string GetOperator(BinaryExpression be)
{
	switch (be.Operator)
	{
		case BinaryOperatorType.Equality:
			return "==";
		case BinaryOperatorType.Inequality:
			return "!=";
		case BinaryOperatorType.Member:
			return "in";
		case BinaryOperatorType.LessThan:
			return "<";
		case BinaryOperatorType.LessThanOrEqual:
			return "<=";
		case BinaryOperatorType.GreaterThan:
			return ">";
		case BinaryOperatorType.GreaterThanOrEqual:
			return ">=";
		default:
			throw new NotSupportedException(be.Operator.ToString());
	}
}

This takes a Boo expression and transform that into the code that creates an object model that represents this expression. Linq is simply an extension to this implementation.

Comments

Andrew Davey
08/04/2008 11:35 PM by
Andrew Davey

Someone from the Nemerle community gave me some similar code for Nemerle:

http://files.rsdn.ru/73/NemerleLinqSupport.zip

Since Nemerle programs are built from expressions, not statements, it makes using the "expression tree" macro inline easier.

I've not used Boo for some time now. Has it got expression macros?

Andrew Davey
08/04/2008 11:37 PM by
Andrew Davey

Re: "Not Interesting"

I agree with you.

I think F#'s computation expressions are more interesting, and certainly more flexible and powerful than LINQ.

Sure they are both monadic syntax - which is awesome - but LINQ is just too limited and basised toward querying.

Arne Claassen
08/05/2008 05:09 PM by
Arne Claassen

"Sure they are both monadic syntax - which is awesome - but LINQ is just too limited and basised toward querying. "

Isn't it called (L)anguage (In)tegrated (Q)uery?

Comments have been closed on this topic.