In production code I would simply write 1 <= x && x <= 100 This is easy to understand and very readable. Starting with C#9.0 we can write x is >= 1 and <= 100 Note that we must write x only once. is introduces a pattern matching expression where and is part of the pattern. && would require us to repeat x is as in x is >= 1 && x is <= 100 Here is a clever method that reduces the number of comparisons from two to one by using some math. There is not necessarily a performance advantage in doing so, but it is elegant. The idea is that one of the two factors becomes negative if the number lies outside of the range and zero if the number is equal to one of the bounds: If the bounds are inclusive: (x - 1) * (100 - x) >= 0 or (x - min) * (max - x) >= 0 If the bounds are exclusive: (x - 1) * (100 - x) > 0 or (x - min) * (max - x) > 0

关于优雅，最接近数学符号(a <= x <= b)的方法略微提高了可读性:

public static bool IsBetween(this int value, int min, int max)
{
    return min <= value && value <= max;
}

为了进一步说明:

public static bool IsOutside(this int value, int min, int max)
{
    return value < min || max < value;
}

像这样的怎么样?

if (theNumber.isBetween(low, high, IntEx.Bounds.INCLUSIVE_INCLUSIVE))
{
}

扩展方法如下(已测试):

public static class IntEx
{
    public enum Bounds 
    {
        INCLUSIVE_INCLUSIVE, 
        INCLUSIVE_EXCLUSIVE, 
        EXCLUSIVE_INCLUSIVE, 
        EXCLUSIVE_EXCLUSIVE
    }

    public static bool isBetween(this int theNumber, int low, int high, Bounds boundDef)
    {
        bool result;
        switch (boundDef)
        {
            case Bounds.INCLUSIVE_INCLUSIVE:
                result = ((low <= theNumber) && (theNumber <= high));
                break;
            case Bounds.INCLUSIVE_EXCLUSIVE:
                result = ((low <= theNumber) && (theNumber < high));
                break;
            case Bounds.EXCLUSIVE_INCLUSIVE:
                result = ((low < theNumber) && (theNumber <= high));
                break;
            case Bounds.EXCLUSIVE_EXCLUSIVE:
                result = ((low < theNumber) && (theNumber < high));
                break;
            default:
                throw new System.ArgumentException("Invalid boundary definition argument");
        }
        return result;
    }
}

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;
    }

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)

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。