http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660@Thilak Debugging lazy LINQ-to-Objects queries is quite inconvenient in comparison with debugging regular collections. Yeh, you can still "enumerate the results", but it's an extra click/keystroke as opposed to watching a collection with a debug visualizer. And, what's more important, you can't watch the result of partial application of a query, e.g. the result of lines 4 and 5, but not 6 on the screenshot above). The best what I can come with is to manually refactor subquery into a local variable, but this requires manual work tho R# can alleviate it significantly. Usually, one has to repeat this for a few times because it's rare to find a bug at the very first watch you perform. http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment13http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment13Tue, 27 Oct 2009 10:29:45 GMTRafal, Yes http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment12http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment12Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:39:39 GMTPls comment your code :) http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment11http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment11Mon, 26 Oct 2009 18:37:20 GMTIs it Newtonsoft.Json? http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment10http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment10Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:29:23 GMTOr let it pluralize "status" :) http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment9http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment9Mon, 26 Oct 2009 15:50:31 GMTAndrew Peters has a port of inflector for .net [http://andrewpeters.net/inflectornet/](http://andrewpeters.net/inflectornet/). http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment8http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment8Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:34:42 GMT@Eugene The code is perfectly debuggable. You realist the debugger allows you to step through linq statements even on vs 2008. http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment7http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment7Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:32:43 GMTYou might want to look at .ToList()ing the enumerabe variables, as leaving them as enumerable will cause "elements" and "attributes" variable to be re-evaluated each time you do anything with them (such as attributes.Count()) - this method may perform a little faster as well... http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment6http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment6Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:28:26 GMTRegarding pluralization. Some time ago I came across an article about pluralization for English: [www.csse.monash.edu.au/.../Plurals.html](http://www.csse.monash.edu.au/~damian/papers/HTML/Plurals.html). Quite like it tbh. http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment5http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment5Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:49:49 GMTPluralize :) ... lol http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment4http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment4Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:47:31 GMTThe Pluralize-method seems a bit naive. Try calling it with "boy" or "monkey". http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment3http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment3Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:39:48 GMTYeah, quite scary, barely debuggable, but I vote for such style. Imho a drastic increase in the quality of both reading (conciseness = less to read, easier to understand) and writing (conciseness = less points to introduce an error) far supercedes these inconveniences. And after all most of the time it's only the signature that matters to this method's user. http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment2http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment2Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:30:20 GMTYou could replace the "Count() == 0" conditions with "!Any()" for additional elegance :) http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment1http://ayende.com/4268/dense-code#comment1Mon, 26 Oct 2009 11:01:22 GMT