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。

如果你想写更多的代码而不是简单的If，也许你可以: 创建一个名为IsBetween的扩展方法

public static class NumberExtensionMethods
{
    public static bool IsBetween(this long value, long Min, long Max)
    {
        // return (value >= Min && value <= Max);
        if (value >= Min && value <= Max) return true;
        else return false;
    }
}

...

// Checks if this number is between 1 and 100.
long MyNumber = 99;
MessageBox.Show(MyNumber.IsBetween(1, 100).ToString());

Addendum: it's worth noting that in practice you very rarely "just check for equality" (or <, >) in a codebase. (Other than in the most trivial situations.) Purely as an example, any game programmer would use categories something like the following in every project, as a basic matter. Note that in this example it (happens to be) using a function (Mathf.Approximately) which is built in to that environment; in practice you typically have to carefully develop your own concepts of what comparisons means for computer representations of real numbers, for the type of situation you are engineering. (Don't even mention that if you're doing something like, perhaps a controller, a PID controller or the like, the whole issue becomes central and very difficult, it becomes the nature of the project.) BY no means is the OP question here a trivial or unimportant question.

private bool FloatLessThan(float a, float b)
    {
    if ( Mathf.Approximately(a,b) ) return false;
    if (a<b) return true;
    return false;
    }

private bool FloatLessThanZero(float a)
    {
    if ( Mathf.Approximately(a,0f) ) return false;
    if (a<0f) return true;
    return false;
    }

private bool FloatLessThanOrEqualToZero(float a)
    {
    if ( Mathf.Approximately(a,0f) ) return true;
    if (a<0f) return true;
    return false;
    }

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 );
}

如果是为了验证方法参数，没有一个解决方案会抛出argumentoutofranceexception，并允许简单/适当地配置包含/排除的最小/最大值。

像这样使用

public void Start(int pos)
{
    pos.CheckRange(nameof(pos), min: 0);

    if (pos.IsInRange(max: 100, maxInclusive: false))
    {
        // ...
    }
}

我只是写出了这些漂亮的函数。它还具有对有效值没有分支(单个if)的优点。最难的部分是制作适当的异常消息。

/// <summary>
/// Returns whether specified value is in valid range.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T">The type of data to validate.</typeparam>
/// <param name="value">The value to validate.</param>
/// <param name="min">The minimum valid value.</param>
/// <param name="minInclusive">Whether the minimum value is valid.</param>
/// <param name="max">The maximum valid value.</param>
/// <param name="maxInclusive">Whether the maximum value is valid.</param>
/// <returns>Whether the value is within range.</returns>
public static bool IsInRange<T>(this T value, T? min = null, bool minInclusive = true, T? max = null, bool maxInclusive = true)
    where T : struct, IComparable<T>
{
    var minValid = min == null || (minInclusive && value.CompareTo(min.Value) >= 0) || (!minInclusive && value.CompareTo(min.Value) > 0);
    var maxValid = max == null || (maxInclusive && value.CompareTo(max.Value) <= 0) || (!maxInclusive && value.CompareTo(max.Value) < 0);
    return minValid && maxValid;
}

/// <summary>
/// Validates whether specified value is in valid range, and throws an exception if out of range.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T">The type of data to validate.</typeparam>
/// <param name="value">The value to validate.</param>
/// <param name="name">The name of the parameter.</param>
/// <param name="min">The minimum valid value.</param>
/// <param name="minInclusive">Whether the minimum value is valid.</param>
/// <param name="max">The maximum valid value.</param>
/// <param name="maxInclusive">Whether the maximum value is valid.</param>
/// <returns>The value if valid.</returns>
public static T CheckRange<T>(this T value, string name, T? min = null, bool minInclusive = true, T? max = null, bool maxInclusive = true)
where T : struct, IComparable<T>
{
    if (!value.IsInRange(min, minInclusive, max, maxInclusive))
    {
        if (min.HasValue && minInclusive && max.HasValue && maxInclusive)
        {
            var message = "{0} must be between {1} and {2}.";
            throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(name, value, message.FormatInvariant(name, min, max));
        }
        else
        {
            var messageMin = min.HasValue ? GetOpText(true, minInclusive).FormatInvariant(min) : null;
            var messageMax = max.HasValue ? GetOpText(false, maxInclusive).FormatInvariant(max) : null;
            var message = (messageMin != null && messageMax != null) ?
                "{0} must be {1} and {2}." :
                "{0} must be {1}.";
            throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(name, value, message.FormatInvariant(name, messageMin ?? messageMax, messageMax));
        }
    }
    return value;
}

private static string GetOpText(bool greaterThan, bool inclusive)
{
    return (greaterThan && inclusive) ? "greater than or equal to {0}" :
        greaterThan ? "greater than {0}" :
        inclusive ? "less than or equal to {0}" :
        "less than {0}";
}

public static string FormatInvariant(this string format, params object?[] args) => string.Format(CultureInfo.InvariantCulture, format, args);

我正在寻找一种优雅的方式来做它的边界可能被切换(即。不确定值的顺序)。

这只适用于存在?:的新版本的c#

bool ValueWithinBounds(float val, float bounds1, float bounds2)
{
    return bounds1 >= bounds2 ?
      val <= bounds1 && val >= bounds2 : 
      val <= bounds2 && val >= bounds1;
}

显然，您可以根据自己的需要更改=号。也可以用类型转换。我只需要在边界内(或等于)返回一个浮点数

当检查一个“数字”是否在一个范围内时，你必须清楚你的意思，两个数字相等意味着什么?一般来说，你应该把所有浮点数包装在一个所谓的“epsilon球”中，这是通过选择一个小的值来完成的，如果两个值如此接近，它们就是相同的。

    private double _epsilon = 10E-9;
    /// <summary>
    /// Checks if the distance between two doubles is within an epsilon.
    /// In general this should be used for determining equality between doubles.
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="x0">The orgin of intrest</param>
    /// <param name="x"> The point of intrest</param>
    /// <param name="epsilon">The minimum distance between the points</param>
    /// <returns>Returns true iff x  in (x0-epsilon, x0+epsilon)</returns>
    public static bool IsInNeghborhood(double x0, double x, double epsilon) => Abs(x0 - x) < epsilon;

    public static bool AreEqual(double v0, double v1) => IsInNeghborhood(v0, v1, _epsilon);

有了这两个辅助，并假设任何数字都可以转换为double而不需要所需的精度。现在需要的是一个枚举和另一个方法

    public enum BoundType
    {
        Open,
        Closed,
        OpenClosed,
        ClosedOpen
    }

另一种方法如下:

    public static bool InRange(double value, double upperBound, double lowerBound, BoundType bound = BoundType.Open)
    {
        bool inside = value < upperBound && value > lowerBound;
        switch (bound)
        {
            case BoundType.Open:
                return inside;
            case BoundType.Closed:
                return inside || AreEqual(value, upperBound) || AreEqual(value, lowerBound); 
            case BoundType.OpenClosed:
                return inside || AreEqual(value, upperBound);
            case BoundType.ClosedOpen:
                return inside || AreEqual(value, lowerBound);
            default:
                throw new System.NotImplementedException("You forgot to do something");
        }
    }

现在，这可能远远超过了您想要的，但它使您不必一直处理舍入问题，并试图记住一个值是否被舍入到哪个位置。如果你需要，你可以很容易地将它扩展到任意的情况并允许变化。