| .. |
|
Aggregate.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
All.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Any.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
AppendPrepend.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
AsAsyncEnumerable.cs
|
6a3dfda574
Move Create and AsAsyncEnumerable.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Average.Generated.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Average.Generated.tt
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Average.cs
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Cast.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Concat.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Contains.cs
|
1eb95c90fe
Using a null comparer is allowed.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Count.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
DefaultIfEmpty.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Distinct.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ElementAt.cs
|
46668196a3
Align ElementAt behavior with synchronous LINQ.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ElementAtOrDefault.cs
|
c4cf6ed51f
Fixing ElementAtOrDefault behavior.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Empty.cs
|
8fea84666d
Default value of ValueTask is good enough to report completion.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Except.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
First.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
FirstOrDefault.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ForEach.cs
|
c52d01bcc2
Stylistic nit.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
GroupBy.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
GroupJoin.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Grouping.cs
|
67cb696b45
Clean up Grouping.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Intersect.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Join.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Last.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
LastOrDefault.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
LongCount.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Lookup.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Max.Generic.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Max.Primitive.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Max.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Min.Generic.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Min.Primitive.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Min.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
MinMax.Generated.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
MinMax.Generated.tt
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
OfType.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
OrderBy.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
OrderedAsyncEnumerable.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Range.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Repeat.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Reverse.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Select.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
SelectMany.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
SequenceEqual.cs
|
1eb95c90fe
Using a null comparer is allowed.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Single.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
SingleLinkedNode.cs
|
b53998f1d6
More code cleanup.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
SingleOrDefault.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Skip.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
SkipLast.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
SkipWhile.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Sum.Generated.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Sum.Generated.tt
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Take.cs
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
TakeLast.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
TakeWhile.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToArray.cs
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToAsyncEnumerable.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToDictionary.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToEnumerable.cs
|
92515218cc
Fix ToEnumerable's use of ValueTask.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToHashSet.cs
|
1eb95c90fe
Using a null comparer is allowed.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToList.cs
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToLookup.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
ToObservable.cs
|
cfd11d1c62
Adding BCL style exception factories.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Union.cs
|
3a3c59ba42
Change signature of Clone.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Where.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
|
Zip.cs
|
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.
|
7 ani în urmă |
Bart De Smet
aacb761f40
Switch to ValueTask for predicates, selectors, etc. We await those ourselves and they are expected to be called in a high-frequency manner, so this seems to be the right choice. The only drawback is when these operators are used using method group conversion of a Task-returning async method, which is likely rare in query expressions where one typically uses (async) lambdas, and there's a workaround Task-to-ValueTask conversion. We can't overload on ValueTask and Task return types, so this seems the best way forward.