>>>>>>Hi All, is it possible in a "Linq type way" to set properties of class instances which are in a IList ? , for example I have a list of names and addresses in a list and if there are some that share a certain residential area code (e.g. UK ) I would like to set a property in the instances, hope this makes sense.
>>>>>
>>>>>Closest you can get is probably something like:

foreach(Info i in list.Where(x=>x.Postcode.StartsWith="HR"))
>>>>>            {
>>>>>                i.SomeProperty = true;
>>>>>            }

>>>>
>>>>List does have a foreach method (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bwabdf9z%28v=vs.110%29.aspx), but its not really recommended (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert/archive/2009/05/18/foreach-vs-foreach.aspx). There is also a parallel foreach (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd992001%28v=vs.110%29.aspx) you could use if setting the value has no side effects.
>>>
>>>Not sure I agree with the arguments against .ForEach. Anyway, interesting that Reflector for ForEach shows::

public void ForEach(Action<T> action)
>>>{
>>>    if (action == null)
>>>    {
>>>        ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentNullException(ExceptionArgument.match);
>>>    }
>>>    for (int i = 0; i < this._size; i++)
>>>    {
>>>        action(this._items[i]);
>>>    }
>>>}

and foreach:

public bool MoveNext()
>>>{
>>>    if (this.version != this.list._version)
>>>    {
>>>        ThrowHelper.ThrowInvalidOperationException(ExceptionResource.InvalidOperation_EnumFailedVersion);
>>>    }
>>>    if (this.index < this.list._size)
>>>    {
>>>        this.current = this.list._items[this.index];
>>>        this.index++;
>>>        return true;
>>>    }
>>>    this.index = this.list._size + 1;
>>>    this.current = default(T);
>>>    return false;
>>>}

>>
>>
>>fwiw
>>
>>(1) Think for( ; ; )is quicker than for each
>>(2) Your reflector code of the ForEach shows it is using a for( ; ; )
>
>I've a feeling we discussed this in a thread a long time ago :-}
>
Yes - think you're right


>So ? :
>'for' is quicker (and you can break)
>foreach() is more readable (and less error prone)

true