Skip to main content

Reduce heap allocations by using static anonymous functions

As a C# developer you got used to apply anonymous functions everywhere. Everytime you write a LINQ statement or use a lamdbda expression, you are creating an anonymous function.

But what you maybe are not aware of is that anonymous functions have a performance impact and don’t come cheap:

  • Overhead of a delegate invocation (very very small, but it does exist).
  • 2 heap allocations if a lambda captures local variable or argument of enclosing method (one for closure instance and another one for a delegate itself).
  • 1 heap allocation if a lambda captures an enclosing instance state (just a delegate allocation).
  • 0 heap allocations only if a lambda does not capture anything or captures a static state.

One way to limit the number of allocations is through local functions but today I want to focus on another option; using static anonymous functions.

Let’s use a really simple example where static anonymous functions can help:

In the example above we capture the value ‘addition’, causing an unintended allocation. To fix it we can change the implementation to use a static anonymous function. Therefore we have to apply the const modifier on the variable and add the static modifier to the lambda:

Some rules apply when you want to use static anonymous functions:

  • A static anonymous function cannot capture state from the enclosing scope. As a result, locals, parameters, and this from the enclosing scope are not available within a static anonymous function.
  • A static anonymous function cannot reference instance members from an implicit or explicit this or base reference.
  • A static anonymous function may reference static members from the enclosing scope.
  • A static anonymous function may reference constant definitions from the enclosing scope.

Popular posts from this blog

Azure DevOps/ GitHub emoji

I’m really bad at remembering emoji’s. So here is cheat sheet with all emoji’s that can be used in tools that support the github emoji markdown markup: All credits go to rcaviers who created this list.

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME         ...

Cleaner switch expressions with pattern matching in C#

Ever find yourself mapping multiple string values to the same result? Being a C# developer for a long time, I sometimes forget that the C# has evolved so I still dare to chain case labels or reach for a dictionary. Of course with pattern matching this is no longer necessary. With pattern matching, you can express things inline, declaratively, and with zero repetition. A small example I was working on a small script that should invoke different actions depending on the environment. As our developers were using different variations for the same environment e.g.  "tst" alongside "test" , "prd" alongside "prod" .  We asked to streamline this a long time ago, but as these things happen, we still see variations in the wild. This brought me to the following code that is a perfect example for pattern matching: The or keyword here is a logical pattern combinator , not a boolean operator. It matches if either of the specified pattern...