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.

把别人说的话用更简洁的方式来表达……

例外情况只适用于特殊情况

如果这个方法是纯数据访问层，我会说，给定一些参数，被包含在一个选择语句中，它将期望我可能找不到任何行，从中构建一个对象，因此返回null将是可接受的，因为这是数据访问逻辑。

另一方面，如果我希望我的参数反映一个主键，我应该只返回一行，如果我返回了不止一行，我就会抛出异常。0可以返回null, 2则不行。

现在，如果我有一些登录代码检查LDAP提供程序，然后检查DB以获得更多详细信息，并且我希望它们始终保持同步，那么我可能会抛出异常。正如其他人所说，这是商业规则。

Now I'll say that is a general rule. There are times where you may want to break that. However, my experience and experiments with C# (lots of that) and Java(a bit of that) has taught me that it is much more expensive performance wise to deal with exceptions than to handle predictable issues via conditional logic. I'm talking to the tune of 2 or 3 orders of magnitude more expensive in some cases. So, if it's possible your code could end up in a loop, then I would advise returning null and testing for it.

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.

我个人返回该对象的默认实例。原因是我希望该方法返回0到多或0到1(取决于该方法的目的)。使用这种方法，它将是任何类型的错误状态的唯一原因是，如果方法不返回任何对象，并且总是期望返回(就一对多或单数返回而言)。

至于假设这是一个业务领域的问题——我只是没有从等式的那一边看到它。返回类型的规范化是一个有效的应用程序体系结构问题。至少，它是编码实践标准化的主题。我怀疑是否有业务用户会说“在场景X中，只给他们一个null”。

如果返回的对象是可以迭代的对象，我将返回一个空对象，这样我就不必首先测试null。

例子:

bool IsAdministrator(User user)
{
    var groupsOfUser = GetGroupsOfUser(user);

    // This foreach would cause a run time exception if groupsOfUser is null.
    foreach (var groupOfUser in groupsOfUser) 
    {
        if (groupOfUser.Name == "Administrators")
        {
            return true;
        }
    }

    return false;
}

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。