我如何用c#优雅地做到这一点?

例如,一个数字可以是1到100之间。

我知道一个简单的if (x >= 1 && x <= 100)就足够了;但是有很多语法糖和新特性不断添加到c# /。Net这个问题是关于更习惯的(一个可以称之为优雅的)写法。

性能不是问题,但请在非O(1)的解决方案中添加性能说明,因为人们可能会复制粘贴建议。


当前回答

有很多选择:

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

实际上,基本的,如果更优雅的话,可以在第一张支票中用倒序写:

if (1 <= x && x <= 100)   //true

此外,查看这篇SO帖子的正则表达式选项。

注:

LINQ solution is strictly for style points - since Contains iterates over all items its complexity is O(range_size) and not O(1) normally expected from a range check. More generic version for other ranges (notice that second argument is count, not end): if (Enumerable.Range(start, end - start + 1).Contains(x) There is temptation to write if solution without && like 1 <= x <= 100 - that look really elegant, but in C# leads to a syntax error "Operator '<=' cannot be applied to operands of type 'bool' and 'int'"

其他回答

你的意思是?

if(number >= 1 && number <= 100)

or

bool TestRange (int numberToCheck, int bottom, int top)
{
  return (numberToCheck >= bottom && numberToCheck <= top);
}

编辑:提供了新的答案。 当我写这个问题的第一个答案时,我刚刚开始使用c#,事后我意识到我的“解决方案”是幼稚和低效的。

我最初的回答是: 我会选择更简单的版本:

' if(Enumerable.Range(1100).Contains(intInQuestion)){…DoStuff;} '

更好的方法

因为我还没有看到任何其他更有效的解决方案(至少根据我的测试),我将再试一次。

新的和更好的方法,也适用于负范围:

// Returns true if x is in range [min..max], else false 
bool inRange(int x, int min=1, int max=100) => ((x - max)*(x - min) <= 0);

这可以用于正负范围,并且默认为

1 . . 100(包括)并使用x作为数字来检查,然后是由min和max定义的可选范围。

为好的措施添加例子

示例1:

// Returns true if x is in range [min..max], else false 
bool inRange(int x, int min=1, int max=100) => ((x - max)*(x - min) <= 0);

Console.WriteLine(inRange(25));
Console.WriteLine(inRange(1));
Console.WriteLine(inRange(100));
Console.WriteLine(inRange(25, 30, 150));
Console.WriteLine(inRange(-25, -50, 0));

返回:

True
True
True
False
True

示例2: 使用100000个1到150之间的随机整数的列表

// Returns true if x is in range [min..max], else false 
bool inRange(int x, int min=1, int max=100) => ((x - max)*(x - min) <= 0);

// Generate 100000 ints between 1 and 150
var intsToCheck = new List<int>();
var randGen = new Random();
for(int i = 0; i < 100000; ++i){
    intsToCheck.Add(randGen.Next(150) + 1);
}

var counter = 0;
foreach(int n in intsToCheck) {
    if(inRange(n)) ++counter;
}

Console.WriteLine("{0} ints found in range 1..100", counter);

返回:

66660 ints found in range 1..100

Execution Time: 0.016 second(s)

这些是一些可以提供帮助的扩展方法

  public static bool IsInRange<T>(this T value, T min, T max)
where T : System.IComparable<T>
    {
        return value.IsGreaterThenOrEqualTo(min) && value.IsLessThenOrEqualTo(max);
    }


    public static bool IsLessThenOrEqualTo<T>(this T value, T other)
         where T : System.IComparable<T>
    {
        var result = value.CompareTo(other);
        return result == -1 || result == 0;
    }


    public static bool IsGreaterThenOrEqualTo<T>(this T value, T other)
         where T : System.IComparable<T>
    {
        var result = value.CompareTo(other);
        return result == 1 || result == 0;
    }

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

你在寻找[1..100]?这只是帕斯卡。