In C, if time efficiency is crucial and integer overflows will wrap, one could do if ((unsigned)(value-min) <= (max-min)) .... If 'max' and 'min' are independent variables, the extra subtraction for (max-min) will waste time, but if that expression can be precomputed at compile time, or if it can be computed once at run-time to test many numbers against the same range, the above expression may be computed efficiently even in the case where the value is within range (if a large fraction of values will be below the valid range, it may be faster to use if ((value >= min) && (value <= max)) ... because it will exit early if value is less than min).

不过，在使用这样的实现之前，请先对目标机器进行基准测试。在某些处理器上，由两部分组成的表达式可能在所有情况下都更快，因为两个比较可能是独立完成的，而在减法和比较方法中，减法必须在比较执行之前完成。

我使用下一个“优雅”的解决方案:

using static System.Linq.Enumerable;

int x = 30;
if (Range(1,100).Contains(x))  //true

来自微软文档

using static指令适用于任何具有静态成员(或嵌套类型)的类型，即使它也具有实例成员。但是，实例成员只能通过类型实例调用。

你可以访问一个类型的静态成员，而不需要用类型名限定访问:

但这对许多人来说并不简单，因为Enumerable。Range有第一个参数start和第二个参数count。 所以这种检查可能在特定情况下有用，比如当你使用Enumerable时。范围的foreach循环，在开始之前，您想知道，如果循环将执行。

例如:

        int count = 100;
        int x = 30;

        if (!Range(1, count).Contains(x)) {
            Console.WriteLine("Do nothing!");
            return;
        }

        foreach (var i in Range(1, count)) {
            // Some job here
        }

只是为了增加这里的噪音，你可以创建一个扩展方法:

public static bool IsWithin(this int value, int minimum, int maximum)
{
    return value >= minimum && value <= maximum;
}

这样你就能做…

int val = 15;

bool foo = val.IsWithin(5,20);

话虽如此，当检查本身只有一行时，这样做似乎是一件愚蠢的事情。

In production code I would simply write 1 <= x && x <= 100 This is easy to understand and very readable. Starting with C#9.0 we can write x is >= 1 and <= 100 Note that we must write x only once. is introduces a pattern matching expression where and is part of the pattern. && would require us to repeat x is as in x is >= 1 && x is <= 100 Here is a clever method that reduces the number of comparisons from two to one by using some math. There is not necessarily a performance advantage in doing so, but it is elegant. The idea is that one of the two factors becomes negative if the number lies outside of the range and zero if the number is equal to one of the bounds: If the bounds are inclusive: (x - 1) * (100 - x) >= 0 or (x - min) * (max - x) >= 0 If the bounds are exclusive: (x - 1) * (100 - x) > 0 or (x - min) * (max - x) > 0

优雅是因为它不需要确定两个边界值中哪个先大。它也不包含分支。

public static bool InRange(float val, float a, float b)
{
    // Determine if val lies between a and b without first asking which is larger (a or b)
    return ( a <= val & val < b ) | ( b <= val & val < a );
}

如果您关心@Daap对已接受答案的注释，并且只能传递一次值，则可以尝试以下方法之一

bool TestRangeDistance (int numberToCheck, int bottom, int distance)
{
  return (numberToCheck >= bottom && numberToCheck <= bottom+distance);
}

//var t = TestRangeDistance(10, somelist.Count()-5, 10);

or

bool TestRangeMargin (int numberToCheck, int target, int margin)
{
  return (numberToCheck >= target-margin && numberToCheck <= target+margin);
}

//var t = TestRangeMargin(10, somelist.Count(), 5);