Can I restructure the following into a more compact linq query, ideally without the introduction of a helper function?
var revPerUnitChanges =
from row in this.DataTable.GetChanges(DataRowState.Modified).AsEnumerable()
let field = "Rev/Unit"
select new {
Field = field,
From = row.Field<decimal>(field, DataRowVersion.Original),
To = row.Field<decimal>(field, DataRowVersion.Current),
ItemIds = row.Field<string>("ItemIds"),};
var costPerUnitChanges =
from row in this.DataTable.GetChanges(DataRowState.Modified).AsEnumerable()
let field = "Cost/Unit"
select new {
Field = field,
From = row.Field<decimal>(field, DataRowVersion.Original),
To = row.Field<decimal>(field, DataRowVersion.Current),
ItemIds = row.Field<string>("ItemIds"), };
var numUnitsChanges =
from row in this.DataTable.GetChanges(DataRowState.Modified).AsEnumerable()
let field = "Units"
select new {
Field = field,
From = row.Field<decimal>(field, DataRowVersion.Original),
To = row.Field<decimal>(field, DataRowVersion.Current),
ItemIds = row.Field<string>("ItemIds"), };
var changes =
revPerUnitChanges
.Concat(costPerUnitChanges
.Concat(numUnitsChanges))
.Where(c => c.From != c.To);
Start out by creating a helper class to hold onto the data. (Your code doesn’t have any problems using anonymous types, but if you want to refactor sections into methods it’ll be much easier with a named class.)
Now that we have that out of the way the query is fairly straightforward.