<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Prototyping LINQ using LINQPad</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bugfree.dk/blog/2008/06/29/prototyping-linq-using-linqpad/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bugfree.dk/blog/2008/06/29/prototyping-linq-using-linqpad/</link>
	<description>Not anti-anything, just pro-quality</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 07:18:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bugfree.dk &#8211; Ronnie Holm&#039;s blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Demystifying LINQ to Objects</title>
		<link>http://www.bugfree.dk/blog/2008/06/29/prototyping-linq-using-linqpad/comment-page-1/#comment-31742</link>
		<dc:creator>Bugfree.dk &#8211; Ronnie Holm&#039;s blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Demystifying LINQ to Objects</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 07:28:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bugfree.dk/blog/2008/06/29/prototyping-linq-using-linqpad/#comment-31742</guid>
		<description>[...] You’d typically rely on type inference and the var keyword for declaring the type of the result. But to make LINQ more transparent I’ll explicitly state the return type. At the same time I’ll transform the query expression syntax into lambda expression syntax. What the compiler would otherwise do is transform each standard query operator, such as Where and Select, into a corresponding method call on the collection, passing in a lambda expression. Both representations are semantically equivalent, but for this simple query the lambda expression syntax appears more complex. This is generally not the case for either representation as you can see with a tool like LINQPad. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] You’d typically rely on type inference and the var keyword for declaring the type of the result. But to make LINQ more transparent I’ll explicitly state the return type. At the same time I’ll transform the query expression syntax into lambda expression syntax. What the compiler would otherwise do is transform each standard query operator, such as Where and Select, into a corresponding method call on the collection, passing in a lambda expression. Both representations are semantically equivalent, but for this simple query the lambda expression syntax appears more complex. This is generally not the case for either representation as you can see with a tool like LINQPad. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

