在我看来，你的帮手方法是最干净的方法。如果传入一个列表或数组，那么不道德的代码段可能会强制转换它并更改内容，从而在某些情况下导致奇怪的行为。您可以使用只读集合，但这可能涉及更多的包装。我认为你的解决办法非常巧妙。

I agree with @EarthEngine's comments to the original post, which is that 'AsSingleton' is a better name. See this wikipedia entry. Then it follows from the definition of singleton that if a null value is passed as an argument that 'AsSingleton' should return an IEnumerable with a single null value instead of an empty IEnumerable which would settle the if (item == null) yield break; debate. I think the best solution is to have two methods: 'AsSingleton' and 'AsSingletonOrEmpty'; where, in the event that a null is passed as an argument, 'AsSingleton' will return a single null value and 'AsSingletonOrEmpty' will return an empty IEnumerable. Like this:

public static IEnumerable<T> AsSingletonOrEmpty<T>(this T source)
{
    if (source == null)
    {
        yield break;
    }
    else
    {
        yield return source;
    }
}

public static IEnumerable<T> AsSingleton<T>(this T source)
{
    yield return source;
}

然后，这些将或多或少类似于IEnumerable上的'First'和'FirstOrDefault'扩展方法，这感觉是对的。

这比yield或Enumerable快30%。由于这种c#编译器优化，在foreach中重复使用，在其他情况下也具有相同的性能。

public struct SingleSequence<T> : IEnumerable<T> {
    public struct SingleEnumerator : IEnumerator<T> {
        private readonly SingleSequence<T> _parent;
        private bool _couldMove;
        public SingleEnumerator(ref SingleSequence<T> parent) {
            _parent = parent;
            _couldMove = true;
        }
        public T Current => _parent._value;
        object IEnumerator.Current => Current;
        public void Dispose() { }

        public bool MoveNext() {
            if (!_couldMove) return false;
            _couldMove = false;
            return true;
        }
        public void Reset() {
            _couldMove = true;
        }
    }
    private readonly T _value;
    public SingleSequence(T value) {
        _value = value;
    }
    public IEnumerator<T> GetEnumerator() {
        return new SingleEnumerator(ref this);
    }
    IEnumerator IEnumerable.GetEnumerator() {
        return new SingleEnumerator(ref this);
    }
}

在这个测试中:

    // Fastest among seqs, but still 30x times slower than direct sum
    // 49 mops vs 37 mops for yield, or c.30% faster
    [Test]
    public void SingleSequenceStructForEach() {
        var sw = new Stopwatch();
        sw.Start();
        long sum = 0;
        for (var i = 0; i < 100000000; i++) {
            foreach (var single in new SingleSequence<int>(i)) {
                sum += single;
            }
        }
        sw.Stop();
        Console.WriteLine($"Elapsed {sw.ElapsedMilliseconds}");
        Console.WriteLine($"Mops {100000.0 / sw.ElapsedMilliseconds * 1.0}");
    }

有时候，当我觉得很顽皮的时候，我会这样做:

"_".Select(_ => 3.14)  // or whatever; any type is fine

这和少按shift键是一样的:

from _ in "_" select 3.14

对于一个实用函数，我发现这是最不冗长的，或者至少比数组更具自文档性，尽管它会让多个值滑动;作为加号，它可以被定义为一个局部函数:

static IEnumerable<T> Enumerate (params T[] v) => v;
// usage:
IEnumerable<double> example = Enumerate(1.234);

以下是我能想到的所有其他方法(这里是可运行的):

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

public class Program {
    
    public static IEnumerable<T> ToEnumerable1 <T> (T v) {
        yield return v;
    }
    
    public static T[] ToEnumerable2 <T> (params T[] vs) => vs;
    
    public static void Main () {
        static IEnumerable<T> ToEnumerable3 <T> (params T[] v) => v;
        p( new string[] { "three" } );
        p( new List<string> { "three" } );
        p( ToEnumerable1("three") ); // our utility function (yield return)
        p( ToEnumerable2("three") ); // our utility function (params)
        p( ToEnumerable3("three") ); // our local utility function (params)
        p( Enumerable.Empty<string>().Append("three") );
        p( Enumerable.Empty<string>().DefaultIfEmpty("three") );
        p( Enumerable.Empty<string>().Prepend("three") );
        p( Enumerable.Range(3, 1) ); // only for int
        p( Enumerable.Range(0, 1).Select(_ => "three") );
        p( Enumerable.Repeat("three", 1) );
        p( "_".Select(_ => "three") ); // doesn't have to be "_"; just any one character
        p( "_".Select(_ => 3.3333) );
        p( from _ in "_" select 3.0f );
        p( "a" ); // only for char
        // these weren't available for me to test (might not even be valid):
        //   new Microsoft.Extensions.Primitives.StringValues("three")
        
    }

    static void p <T> (IEnumerable<T> e) =>
        Console.WriteLine(string.Join(' ', e.Select((v, k) => $"[{k}]={v,-8}:{v.GetType()}").DefaultIfEmpty("<empty>")));

}

我更喜欢

public static IEnumerable<T> Collect<T>(this T item, params T[] otherItems)
{
    yield return item;
    foreach (var otherItem in otherItems)
    {
        yield return otherItem;
    }
}

如果你想要单例，这允许你调用item. collect()，但它也允许你调用item。如果你想收集(item2, item3)

在c# 3(我知道你说的是2)中，你可以编写一个泛型扩展方法，这可能会使语法更容易接受:

static class IEnumerableExtensions
{
    public static IEnumerable<T> ToEnumerable<T>(this T item)
    {
        yield return item;
    }
}

客户端代码是item.ToEnumerable()。