什么时候布尔值既不为真也不为假?

比尔发现你可以破解一个布尔值，如果a为真，B为真，(a和B)为假。

砍布尔值

我来派对晚了一点，但我有三四五

If you poll InvokeRequired on a control that hasn't been loaded/shown, it will say false - and blow up in your face if you try to change it from another thread (the solution is to reference this.Handle in the creator of the control). Another one which tripped me up is that given an assembly with: enum MyEnum { Red, Blue, } if you calculate MyEnum.Red.ToString() in another assembly, and in between times someone has recompiled your enum to: enum MyEnum { Black, Red, Blue, } at runtime, you will get "Black". I had a shared assembly with some handy constants in. My predecessor had left a load of ugly-looking get-only properties, I thought I'd get rid of the clutter and just use public const. I was more than a little surprised when VS compiled them to their values, and not references. If you implement a new method of an interface from another assembly, but you rebuild referencing the old version of that assembly, you get a TypeLoadException (no implementation of 'NewMethod'), even though you have implemented it (see here). Dictionary<,>: "The order in which the items are returned is undefined". This is horrible, because it can bite you sometimes, but work others, and if you've just blindly assumed that Dictionary is going to play nice ("why shouldn't it? I thought, List does"), you really have to have your nose in it before you finally start to question your assumption.

以下是我的一些建议:

当调用实例方法而不抛出NullReferenceException时，此值可以为null 不必为枚举定义默认枚举值

首先简单一点: enum NoZero ｛ Number = 1 }

        public bool ReturnsFalse()
        {
            //The default value is not defined!
            return Enum.IsDefined(typeof (NoZero), default(NoZero));
        }

下面的代码实际上可以打印真!

 internal sealed class Strange
{
    public void Foo()
    {
        Console.WriteLine(this == null);
    }
}

一段简单的客户端代码将导致这样的结果 HelloDelegate(奇怪的条);

public class Program
{
    [STAThread()]
    public static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        Strange bar = null;
        var hello = new DynamicMethod("ThisIsNull",
            typeof(void), new[] { typeof(Strange) },
         typeof(Strange).Module);
        ILGenerator il = hello.GetILGenerator(256);
        il.Emit(OpCodes.Ldarg_0);
        var foo = typeof(Strange).GetMethod("Foo");
        il.Emit(OpCodes.Call, foo);
        il.Emit(OpCodes.Ret);
        var print = (HelloDelegate)hello.CreateDelegate(typeof(HelloDelegate));
        print(bar);
        Console.ReadLine();
    }
}

这在大多数语言中都是正确的，只要调用实例方法时不使用对象的状态。只有在访问对象的状态时才解除引用

银行家的舍入。

这不是一个编译器错误或故障，但肯定是一个奇怪的极端情况…

. net框架采用了一种被称为银行家舍入的方案或舍入。

在银行家的四舍五入中，0.5的数字四舍五入到最接近的偶数，所以

Math.Round(-0.5) == 0
Math.Round(0.5) == 0
Math.Round(1.5) == 2
Math.Round(2.5) == 2
etc...

这可能会导致基于更广为人知的四舍五入的财务计算中出现一些意想不到的错误。

Visual Basic也是如此。

c#无障碍谜题

下面的派生类正在从它的基类中访问一个私有字段，编译器会默默地查看另一端:

public class Derived : Base
{
    public int BrokenAccess()
    {
        return base.m_basePrivateField;
    }
}

这个领域确实是私有的:

private int m_basePrivateField = 0;

想猜猜我们如何编译这样的代码吗?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

回答

诀窍是将Derived声明为Base的内部类:

public class Base
{
    private int m_basePrivateField = 0;

    public class Derived : Base
    {
        public int BrokenAccess()
        {
            return base.m_basePrivateField;
        }
    }
}

内部类可以完全访问外部类成员。在这种情况下，内部类也恰好派生自外部类。这允许我们“打破”私有成员的封装。

我发现了第二个非常奇怪的极端情况，远远超过了我的第一个。

字符串。Equals Method (String, String, StringComparison)实际上并不是没有副作用的。

我当时在写一段代码，在某个函数的顶部有一行这样的代码:

stringvariable1.Equals(stringvariable2, StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase);

删除这一行将导致程序中其他地方的堆栈溢出。

这段代码实际上是在为BeforeAssemblyLoad事件安装一个处理程序，并尝试执行该处理程序

if (assemblyfilename.EndsWith("someparticular.dll", StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase))
{
    assemblyfilename = "someparticular_modified.dll";
}

到现在我都不用告诉你了。在字符串比较中使用从未使用过的区域性会导致程序集负载。InvariantCulture也不例外。