Measuring the execution time of C# methods is essential for performance optimization and identifying bottlenecks in your application.
The most straightforward approach uses the Stopwatch class from the System.Diagnostics namespace, which provides high-precision timing capabilities.
Stopwatch
System.Diagnostics
This approach is perfect for quick performance checks during development or when troubleshooting specific methods in production code.
Here's a practical example: Imagine you have a method that processes a large dataset and you want to measure its performance.
First, add using System.Diagnostics; to your imports. Then implement timing as shown below:
using System.Diagnostics;
public void MeasurePerformance() { Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch(); // Start timing stopwatch.Start(); // Call the method you want to measure ProcessLargeDataset(); // Stop timing stopwatch.Stop(); // Get the elapsed time Console.WriteLine($"Processing time: {stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds} ms"); // Or use ElapsedTicks for higher precision Console.WriteLine($"Processing ticks: {stopwatch.ElapsedTicks}"); }
For more advanced scenarios, consider using the BenchmarkDotNet library, which offers comprehensive benchmarking with statistical analysis.
BenchmarkDotNet
Simply install the NuGet package, decorate methods with the [Benchmark] attribute, and run BenchmarkRunner.Run<YourBenchmarkClass>() to generate detailed reports comparing different implementation strategies.
[Benchmark]
BenchmarkRunner.Run<YourBenchmarkClass>()
Raw string literals in C# provide a flexible way to work with multiline strings, with some interesting rules around how quotes work.
The key insight is that you can use any number of double quotes (three or more) to delimit your string, as long as the opening and closing sequences have the same number of quotes.
"""
// Three quotes - most common usage string basic = """ This is a basic multiline string """; // Four quotes - when your content has three quotes string withThreeQuotes = """" Here's some text with """quoted""" content """"; // Five quotes - when your content has four quotes string withFourQuotes = """"" Here's text with """"nested"""" quotes """""; // Six quotes - for even more complex scenarios string withFiveQuotes = """""" Look at these """""nested""""" quotes! """""";
The general rule is that if your string content contains N consecutive double quotes, you need to wrap the entire string with at least N+1 quotes. This ensures the compiler can properly distinguish between your content and the string's delimiters.
// Example demonstrating the N+1 rule string example1 = """ No quotes inside """; // 3 quotes is fine string example2 = """" Contains """three quotes""" """"; // Needs 4 quotes (3+1) string example3 = """"" Has """"four quotes"""" """""; // Needs 5 quotes (4+1)
// Indentation example string properlyIndented = """ { "property": "value", "nested": { "deeper": "content" } } """; // This line's position determines the indentation
This flexibility with quote counts makes raw string literals extremely versatile, especially when dealing with content that itself contains quotes, like JSON, XML, or other structured text formats.
When working with SQL Server, you may often need to count the number of unique values in a specific column. This is useful for analyzing data, detecting duplicates, and understanding dataset distributions.
To count the number of unique values in a column, SQL Server provides the COUNT(DISTINCT column_name) function. Here’s a simple example:
COUNT(DISTINCT column_name)
SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT column_name) AS distinct_count FROM table_name;
This query will return the number of unique values in column_name.
column_name
If you need to count distinct combinations of multiple columns, you can use a subquery:
SELECT COUNT(*) AS distinct_count FROM (SELECT DISTINCT column1, column2 FROM table_name) AS subquery;
This approach ensures that only unique pairs of column1 and column2 are counted.
column1
column2
By leveraging COUNT(DISTINCT column_name), you can efficiently analyze your database and extract meaningful insights. Happy querying!
File-scoped namespaces, introduced in C# 10, provide a more concise way to declare namespaces in your code files.
This feature helps reduce nesting levels and makes your code cleaner and more readable. Let's explore how to use them effectively and understand their benefits.
Traditionally, C# developers have used block-scoped namespaces, which require curly braces and add an extra level of indentation:
namespace MyCompany.MyProduct.Features { public class UserService { private readonly string _connectionString; public UserService(string connectionString) { _connectionString = connectionString; } public void CreateUser(string username) { // Implementation } } public record User(string Username, string Email); }
With file-scoped namespaces, you can declare the namespace without braces, reducing indentation and making the code more readable:
namespace MyCompany.MyProduct.Features; public class UserService { private readonly string _connectionString; public UserService(string connectionString) { _connectionString = connectionString; } public void CreateUser(string username) { // Implementation } } public record User(string Username, string Email);
Reduced Indentation: File-scoped namespaces eliminate one level of indentation, making the code easier to read and maintain.
Single Namespace per File: File-scoped namespaces enforce a good practice of having only one namespace per file, improving code organization.
Compatibility: File-scoped namespaces work seamlessly with existing code and can be gradually adopted in your codebase.
When using file-scoped namespaces, keep these points in mind:
When converting existing code to use file-scoped namespaces:
File-scoped namespaces are a simple yet effective feature that can make your C# code more readable and maintainable. While the benefits might seem small, they add up significantly in larger codebases. Consider adopting this modern syntax in your C# projects, especially if you're using C# 10 or later.
Register for my free weekly newsletter.