You should be throwing an exception if it is an exceptional circumstance that you call that code with an invalid user ID. If it is NOT an exceptional circumstance, then what you are essentially doing is using a "getter" method to test whether a user exists or not. That is like trying to open a file to see if it exists or not (lets stick to c#/java here) instead of using the exists method, or trying to access dictionary elements and seeing if they exist by looking at the return value instead of using the "contains" method first.

因此，您很可能会使用诸如“exists”之类的额外方法来首先检查是否存在这样的用户。异常的性能绝对不是完全不使用它们的理由，除非您有真正的性能问题。

我同意这里的大多数帖子，它们趋向于零。

我的理由是，生成一个具有非空属性的空对象可能会导致错误。例如，具有int ID属性的实体的初始值为ID = 0，这是一个完全有效的值。如果这个对象，在某些情况下，被保存到数据库中，这将是一件坏事。

对于任何带有迭代器的东西，我总是使用空集合。类似的

foreach (var eachValue in collection ?? new List<Type>(0))

在我看来是代码的味道。集合属性永远不应该为空。

An edge case is String. Many people say, String.IsNullOrEmpty isn't really necessary, but you cannot always distinguish between an empty string and null. Furthermore, some database systems (Oracle) won't distinguish between them at all ('' gets stored as DBNULL), so you're forced to handle them equally. The reason for that is, most string values either come from user input or from external systems, while neither textboxes nor most exchange formats have different representations for '' and null. So even if the user wants to remove a value, he cannot do anything more than clearing the input control. Also the distinction of nullable and non-nullable nvarchar database fields is more than questionable, if your DBMS is not oracle - a mandatory field that allows '' is weird, your UI would never allow this, so your constraints do not map. So the answer here, in my opinion is, handle them equally, always.

Concerning your question regarding exceptions and performance: If you throw an exception which you cannot handle completely in your program logic, you have to abort, at some point, whatever your program is doing, and ask the user to redo whatever he just did. In that case, the performance penalty of a catch is really the least of your worries - having to ask the user is the elephant in the room (which means re-rendering the whole UI, or sending some HTML through the internet). So if you don't follow the anti-pattern of "Program Flow with Exceptions", don't bother, just throw one if it makes sense. Even in borderline cases, such as "Validation Exception", performance is really not an issue, since you have to ask the user again, in any case.

在我们的业务对象中，我们有两个主要的Get方法:

为了让事情在语境中变得简单，或者你的问题是:

// Returns null if user does not exist
public UserEntity GetUserById(Guid userId)
{
}

// Returns a New User if user does not exist
public UserEntity GetNewOrExistingUserById(Guid userId)
{
}

第一种方法用于获取特定的实体，第二种方法用于在网页上添加或编辑实体。

这使我们能够在使用它们的上下文中两全其美。

如果您打算表示没有可用的数据，返回null通常是最好的主意。

空对象表示已返回数据，而返回null则明确表示没有返回任何数据。

此外，如果试图访问对象中的成员，返回null将导致null异常，这对于突出显示有bug的代码很有用——试图访问没有任何成员的成员是没有意义的。访问空对象的成员不会失败，这意味着bug不会被发现。

它将根据上下文而变化，但如果我正在寻找一个特定的对象(如您的示例)，我通常会返回null，如果我正在寻找一组对象，但没有对象，则返回空集合。

如果你在代码中犯了一个错误，返回null会导致空指针异常，那么越早发现越好。如果您返回一个空对象，最初使用它可能会工作，但稍后可能会得到错误。

有趣的问题，我认为没有“正确”的答案，因为它总是取决于你的代码的职责。您的方法是否知道没有找到的数据是否存在问题?在大多数情况下，答案是“不”，这就是为什么返回null并让调用者处理他的情况是完美的。

也许区分抛出方法和返回null方法的一个好方法是在您的团队中找到一个约定:如果没有得到任何东西，表示它们“得到”某些东西的方法应该抛出异常。可能返回null的方法可以以不同的方式命名，可能是“Find…”。