Using an && expression to join two comparisons is simply the most elegant way to do this. If you try using fancy extension methods and such, you run into the question of whether to include the upper bound, the lower bound, or both. Once you start adding additional variables or changing the extension names to indicate what is included, your code becomes longer and harder to read (for the vast majority of programmers). Furthermore, tools like Resharper will warn you if your comparison doesn't make sense (number > 100 && number < 1), which they won't do if you use a method ('i.IsBetween(100, 1)').

我要做的唯一另一个评论是，如果你检查输入的意图是抛出异常，你应该考虑使用代码契约:

Contract.Requires(number > 1 && number < 100)

这比if(…)抛出new Exception(…)更优雅，如果有人试图调用您的方法而没有首先确保该数字在边界内，您甚至可以得到编译时警告。

我不知道，但我用这个方法:

    public static Boolean isInRange(this Decimal dec, Decimal min, Decimal max, bool includesMin = true, bool includesMax = true ) {

    return (includesMin ? (dec >= min) : (dec > min)) && (includesMax ? (dec <= max) : (dec < max));
}

这是我使用它的方式:

    [TestMethod]
    public void IsIntoTheRange()
    {
        decimal dec = 54;

        Boolean result = false;

        result = dec.isInRange(50, 60); //result = True
        Assert.IsTrue(result);

        result = dec.isInRange(55, 60); //result = False
        Assert.IsFalse(result);

        result = dec.isInRange(54, 60); //result = True
        Assert.IsTrue(result);

        result = dec.isInRange(54, 60, false); //result = False
        Assert.IsFalse(result);

        result = dec.isInRange(32, 54, false, false);//result = False
        Assert.IsFalse(result);

        result = dec.isInRange(32, 54, false);//result = True
        Assert.IsTrue(result);
    }

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。

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)

通过一些扩展方法的滥用，我们可以得到以下“优雅”的解决方案:

using System;

namespace Elegant {
    public class Range {
        public int Lower { get; set; }
        public int Upper { get; set; }
    }

    public static class Ext {
        public static Range To(this int lower, int upper) {
            return new Range { Lower = lower, Upper = upper };
        }

        public static bool In(this int n, Range r) {
            return n >= r.Lower && n <= r.Upper;
        }
    }

    class Program {
        static void Main() {
            int x = 55;
            if (x.In(1.To(100)))
                Console.WriteLine("it's in range! elegantly!");
        }
    }
}

在c#中，关于速度和代码原的最佳解决方案，只有一次比较，没有约束检查，并且不会因溢出而容易出错:

public static bool IsInRange(int value, int min, int max) => (uint)(value - min) <= (uint)(max - min);

最小值和最大值包括在内。