How to Only Read the First N Lines of a File in C#

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}>";
}

3. 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.

Removing duplicates from a list in C# is a common task, especially when working with large datasets. C# provides multiple ways to achieve this efficiently, leveraging built-in collections and LINQ.

Using HashSet (Fastest for Unique Elements)

A HashSet<T> automatically removes duplicates since it only stores unique values. This is one of the fastest methods:

List<int> numbers = new List<int> { 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5 };
numbers = new HashSet<int>(numbers).ToList();
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(", ", numbers)); // Output: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Using LINQ Distinct (Concise and Readable)

LINQ’s Distinct() method provides an elegant way to remove duplicates:

List<int> numbers = new List<int> { 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5 };
numbers = numbers.Distinct().ToList();
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(", ", numbers)); // Output: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Removing Duplicates by Custom Property (For Complex Objects)

When working with objects, DistinctBy() from .NET 6+ simplifies duplicate removal based on a property:

using System.Linq;
using System.Collections.Generic;

class Person
{
    public string Name { get; set; }
    public int Age { get; set; }
}

List<Person> people = new List<Person>
{
    new Person { Name = "Alice", Age = 30 },
    new Person { Name = "Bob", Age = 25 },
    new Person { Name = "Alice", Age = 30 }
};

people = people.DistinctBy(p => p.Name).ToList();
Console.WriteLine(string.Join(", ", people.Select(p => p.Name))); // Output: Alice, Bob

For earlier .NET versions, use GroupBy():

people = people.GroupBy(p => p.Name).Select(g => g.First()).ToList();

Performance Considerations

• HashSet<T> is the fastest but only works for simple types.
• Distinct() is easy to use but slower than HashSet<T> for large lists.
• DistinctBy() (or GroupBy()) is useful for complex objects but may have performance trade-offs.

Conclusion

Choosing the best approach depends on the data type and use case. HashSet<T> is ideal for primitive types, Distinct() is simple and readable, and DistinctBy() (or GroupBy()) is effective for objects.

Closing a SqlDataReader correctly prevents memory leaks, connection issues, and unclosed resources. Here’s the best way to do it.

Use 'using' to Auto-Close

Using using statements ensures SqlDataReader and SqlConnection are closed even if an exception occurs.

Example

using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(connectionString))
{
    conn.Open();
    using (SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM Users", conn))
    using (SqlDataReader reader = cmd.ExecuteReader())
    {
        while (reader.Read())
        {
            Console.WriteLine(reader["Username"]);
        }
    } // ✅ Auto-closes reader here
} // ✅ Auto-closes connection here

This approach auto-closes resources when done and it is cleaner and less error-prone than manual closing.

⚡ Alternative: Manually Close in finally Block

If you need explicit control, you can manually close it inside a finally block.

SqlDataReader? reader = null;
try
{
    using SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection(connectionString);
    conn.Open();
    using SqlCommand cmd = new SqlCommand("SELECT * FROM Users", conn);
    reader = cmd.ExecuteReader();

    while (reader.Read())
    {
        Console.WriteLine(reader["Username"]);
    }
}
finally
{
    reader?.Close();  // ✅ Closes reader if it was opened
}

This is slightly more error prone if you forget to add a finally block. But might make sense when you need to handle the reader separately from the command or connection.