C# foreach vs for loop: Which is faster and when to use each

When it comes to iterating over collections in C#, the performance difference between foreach and for loops primarily depends on the collection type being traversed.

For arrays and Lists, a traditional for loop with indexing can be marginally faster because it avoids the overhead of creating an enumerator object, especially in performance-critical scenarios.

The foreach loop internally creates an IEnumerator, which adds a small memory allocation and method call overhead.

However, for most modern applications, this performance difference is negligible and often optimized away by the JIT compiler.

The readability benefits of foreach typically outweigh the minor performance gains of for loops in non-critical code paths.

Collections like LinkedList or those implementing only IEnumerable actually perform better with foreach since they don't support efficient random access.

The rule of thumb: use foreach for readability in most cases, and only switch to for loops when benchmarking shows a meaningful performance improvement in your specific high-performance scenarios.

Example

// Collection to iterate
List<int> numbers = Enumerable.Range(1, 10000).ToList();

// Using for loop
public void ForLoopExample(List<int> items)
{
    int sum = 0;
    for (int i = 0; i < items.Count; i++)
    {
        sum += items[i];
    }
    // For loop can be slightly faster for List<T> and arrays
    // because it avoids creating an enumerator
}

// Using foreach loop 
public void ForEachLoopExample(List<int> items)
{
    int sum = 0;
    foreach (int item in items)
    {
        sum += item;
    }
    // More readable and works well for any collection type
    // Preferred for most scenarios where performance isn't critical
}

// For a LinkedList, foreach is typically faster
public void LinkedListExample(LinkedList<int> linkedItems)
{
    int sum = 0;
    // This would be inefficient with a for loop since LinkedList
    // doesn't support efficient indexing
    foreach (int item in linkedItems)
    {
        sum += item;
    }
}
1
128

Related

When working with URLs in C#, encoding is essential to ensure that special characters (like spaces, ?, &, and =) don’t break the URL structure. The recommended way to encode a string for a URL is by using Uri.EscapeDataString(), which converts unsafe characters into their percent-encoded equivalents.

string rawText = "hello world!";
string encodedText = Uri.EscapeDataString(rawText);

Console.WriteLine(encodedText); // Output: hello%20world%21

This method encodes spaces as %20, making it ideal for query parameters.

For ASP.NET applications, you can also use HttpUtility.UrlEncode() (from System.Web), which encodes spaces as +:

using System.Web;

string encodedText = HttpUtility.UrlEncode("hello world!");
Console.WriteLine(encodedText); // Output: hello+world%21

For .NET Core and later, Uri.EscapeDataString() is the preferred choice.

26
416

Primary constructors, introduced in C# 12, offer a more concise way to define class parameters and initialize fields.

This feature reduces boilerplate code and makes classes more readable.

Traditional Approach vs Primary Constructor

Before primary constructors, you would likely write something like the following:

public class UserService
{
    private readonly ILogger _logger;
    private readonly IUserRepository _repository;

    public UserService(ILogger logger, IUserRepository repository)
    {
        _logger = logger;
        _repository = repository;
    }

    public async Task<User> GetUserById(int id)
    {
        _logger.LogInformation("Fetching user {Id}", id);
        return await _repository.GetByIdAsync(id);
    }
}

With primary constructors, this becomes:

public class UserService(ILogger logger, IUserRepository repository)
{
    public async Task<User> GetUserById(int id)
    {
        logger.LogInformation("Fetching user {Id}", id);
        return await repository.GetByIdAsync(id);
    }
}

Key Benefits

  1. Reduced Boilerplate: No need to declare private fields and write constructor assignments
  2. Parameters Available Throughout: Constructor parameters are accessible in all instance methods
  3. Immutability by Default: Parameters are effectively readonly without explicit declaration

Real-World Example

Here's a practical example using primary constructors with dependency injection:

public class OrderProcessor(
    IOrderRepository orderRepo,
    IPaymentService paymentService,
    ILogger<OrderProcessor> logger)
{
    public async Task<OrderResult> ProcessOrder(Order order)
    {
        try
        {
            logger.LogInformation("Processing order {OrderId}", order.Id);
            
            var paymentResult = await paymentService.ProcessPayment(order.Payment);
            if (!paymentResult.Success)
            {
                return new OrderResult(false, "Payment failed");
            }

            await orderRepo.SaveOrder(order);
            return new OrderResult(true, "Order processed successfully");
        }
        catch (Exception ex)
        {
            logger.LogError(ex, "Failed to process order {OrderId}", order.Id);
            throw;
        }
    }
}

Tips and Best Practices

  1. Use primary constructors when the class primarily needs dependencies for its methods
  2. Combine with records for immutable data types:
public record Customer(string Name, string Email)
{
    public string FormattedEmail => $"{Name} <{Email}>";
}
  1. Consider traditional constructors for complex initialization logic

Primary constructors provide a cleaner, more maintainable way to write C# classes, especially when working with dependency injection and simple data objects.

0
68

Slow initial load times can drive users away from your React application. One powerful technique to improve performance is lazy loading - loading components only when they're needed.

Let's explore how to implement this in React.

The Problem with Eager Loading

By default, React bundles all your components together, forcing users to download everything upfront. This makes navigation much quicker and more streamlined once this initial download is complete.

However, depending on the size of your application, it could also create a long initial load time.

import HeavyComponent from './HeavyComponent';
import AnotherHeavyComponent from './AnotherHeavyComponent';

function App() {
  return (
    <div>
      {/* These components load even if user never sees them */}
      <HeavyComponent />
      <AnotherHeavyComponent />
    </div>
  );
}

React.lazy() to the Rescue

React.lazy() lets you defer loading components until they're actually needed:

import React, { lazy, Suspense } from 'react';

// Components are now loaded only when rendered
const HeavyComponent = lazy(() => import('./HeavyComponent'));
const AnotherHeavyComponent = lazy(() => import('./AnotherHeavyComponent'));

function App() {
  return (
    <div>
      <Suspense fallback={<div>Loading...</div>}>
        <HeavyComponent />
        <AnotherHeavyComponent />
      </Suspense>
    </div>
  );
}

Route-Based Lazy Loading

Combine with React Router for even better performance:

import React, { lazy, Suspense } from 'react';
import { BrowserRouter, Routes, Route } from 'react-router-dom';

const Home = lazy(() => import('./pages/Home'));
const Dashboard = lazy(() => import('./pages/Dashboard'));
const Settings = lazy(() => import('./pages/Settings'));

function App() {
  return (
    <BrowserRouter>
      <Suspense fallback={<div>Loading...</div>}>
        <Routes>
          <Route path="/" element={<Home />} />
          <Route path="/dashboard" element={<Dashboard />} />
          <Route path="/settings" element={<Settings />} />
        </Routes>
      </Suspense>
    </BrowserRouter>
  );
}

Implement these techniques in your React application today and watch your load times improve dramatically!

0
91