Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 3855742
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 19, 20262026-05-19T17:49:22+00:00 2026-05-19T17:49:22+00:00

I am creating several byte arrays that need to be joined together to create

  • 0

I am creating several byte arrays that need to be joined together to create one large byte array – i’d prefer not to use byte[]’s at all but have no choice here…

I am adding each one to a List as I create them, so I only have to do the concatenation once I have all the byte[]’s, but my question is, what is the best way of actually doing this?

When I have a list with an unknown number of byte[]’s and I want to concat them all together.

Thanks.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-19T17:49:23+00:00Added an answer on May 19, 2026 at 5:49 pm
    listOfByteArrs.SelectMany(byteArr=>byteArr).ToArray()
    

    The above code will concatenate a sequence of sequences of bytes into one sequence – and store the result in an array.

    Though readable, this is not maximally efficient – it’s not making use of the fact that you already know the length of the resultant byte array and thus can avoid the dynamically extended .ToArray() implementation that necessarily involves multiple allocations and array-copies. Furthermore, SelectMany is implemented in terms of iterators; this means lots+lots of interface calls which is quite slow. However, for small-ish data-set sizes this is unlikely to matter.

    If you need a faster implementation you can do the following:

    var output = new byte[listOfByteArrs.Sum(arr=>arr.Length)];
    int writeIdx=0;
    foreach(var byteArr in listOfByteArrs) {
        byteArr.CopyTo(output, writeIdx);
        writeIdx += byteArr.Length;
    }
    

    or as Martinho suggests:

    var output = new byte[listOfByteArrs.Sum(arr => arr.Length)];
    using(var stream = new MemoryStream(output))
        foreach (var bytes in listOfByteArrs)
            stream.Write(bytes, 0, bytes.Length);
    

    Some timings:

    var listOfByteArrs = Enumerable.Range(1,1000)
        .Select(i=>Enumerable.Range(0,i).Select(x=>(byte)x).ToArray()).ToList();
    

    Using the short method to concatenate these 500500 bytes takes 15ms, using the fast method takes 0.5ms on my machine – YMMV, and note that for many applications both are more than fast enough ;-).

    Finally, you could replace Array.CopyTo with the static Array.Copy, the low-level Buffer.BlockCopy, or a MemoryStream with a preallocated back buffer – these all perform pretty much identically on my tests (x64 .NET 4.0).

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I'm creating a gem which has several scripts in the bin directory the utility
I'm creating a WPF application where several ListView selections are made in a row
I'm creating an API for a module and after I created several methods inside
I am very new to creating webservers - and I have had several goes
I have the binary for several pdf files stored in a collection of Byte
I am currently creating dynamic SSIS packages that import/export and access data between a
I am creating several image dynamically using the following code: function refresh_gallery(galleryidentifier, albumid) {
Creating a patch is very easy in SubVersion, With Tortoise, you right-click and select
Creating hashes of hashes in Ruby allows for convenient two (or more) dimensional lookups.
Creating Traversals for Binary Search Tree with Recursion. void inOrder(void (*inOrderPtr)(T&)) { if(this->left !=

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.