只是为了增加这里的噪音，你可以创建一个扩展方法:

public static bool IsWithin(this int value, int minimum, int maximum)
{
    return value >= minimum && value <= maximum;
}

这样你就能做…

int val = 15;

bool foo = val.IsWithin(5,20);

话虽如此，当检查本身只有一行时，这样做似乎是一件愚蠢的事情。

我会创建一个Range对象，就像这样:

public class Range<T> where T : IComparable
{
    public T InferiorBoundary{get;private set;}
    public T SuperiorBoundary{get;private set;}

    public Range(T inferiorBoundary, T superiorBoundary)
    {
        InferiorBoundary = inferiorBoundary;
        SuperiorBoundary = superiorBoundary;
    }

    public bool IsWithinBoundaries(T value){
        return InferiorBoundary.CompareTo(value) > 0 && SuperiorBoundary.CompareTo(value) < 0;
    }
}

那么你可以这样使用它:

Range<int> myRange = new Range<int>(1,999);
bool isWithinRange = myRange.IsWithinBoundaries(3);

这样你就可以在其他类型中重用它。

如果这是偶然的，你只需要一个简单的If。如果这种情况在很多地方都发生，你可能会考虑这两个:

PostSharp。在方法编译后，用“注入”代码的属性来装饰方法。我不确定，但我可以想象它可以用来做这个。

喜欢的东西:

[Between("parameter", 0, 100)]
public void Foo(int parameter)
{
}

代码合同。优点是可以在编译时通过对代码和使用代码的地方进行静态验证来检查约束。

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。

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 );
}

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'"