Check if string is numeric in one line of code - c#

I'm working with a DNN form-building module that allows for some server-side code to be run based on a condition. For my particular scenario, I need my block of code to run if the first 4 characters of a certain form text are numeric.
The space to type the condition, though, is only one line and I believe gets injected into an if statement somewhere behind the scenes so I don't have the ability to write a mult-line conditional.
If I have a form field called MyField, I might create a simple conditional like this:
[MyField] == "some value"
Then somewhere behind the scenes it gets translated to something like if("some value" == "some value") {
I know that int.TryParse() can be used to determine whether or not a string is numeric but every implementation I've seen requires two lines of code, the first to declare a variable to contain the converted integer and the second to run the actual function.
Is there a way to check to see if the first 4 characters of a string are numeric in just one line that can exist inside an if statement?

Wrap it in an extension method.
public static class StringExtensions
{
public static bool IsNumeric(this string input)
{
int number;
return int.TryParse(input, out number);
}
}
And use it like
if("1234".IsNumeric())
{
// Do stuff..
}
UPDATE since question changed:
public static class StringExtensions
{
public static bool FirstFourAreNumeric(this string input)
{
int number;
if(string.IsNullOrEmpty(input) || input.Length < 4)
{
throw new Exception("Not 4 chars long");
}
return int.TryParse(input.Substring(4), out number);
}
}
And use it like
if("1234abc".FirstFourAreNumeric())
{
// Do stuff..
}

In response to this:
Is there a way to check to see if the first 4 characters of a string are numeric in just one line that can exist inside an if statement?
You guys don't have to make it account for anything more complicated than a positive integer.
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("3466") // true
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("6") // false
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("68ab") // false
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("1111abcdefg") // true
// in an if:
if (new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("3466"))
{
// Do something
}
Old answer:
If you can't use TryParse, you could probably get away with using LINQ:
"12345".All(char.IsDigit); // true
"abcde".All(char.IsDigit); // false
"abc123".All(char.IsDigit); // false
If you can, here's an IsNumeric extension method, with usage:
public static class NumberExtensions
{
// <= C#6
public static bool IsNumeric(this string str)
{
float f;
return float.TryParse(str, out f);
}
// C# 7+
public static bool IsNumeric(this string str) => float.TryParse(str, out var _);
}
// ... elsewhere
"123".IsNumeric(); // true
"abc".IsNumeric(); // false, etc
"-1.7e5".IsNumeric(); // true

How about some easy LinQ?
if (str.Take(4).All(char.IsDigit) { ... }

Related

How to parse a string and a bool array to a method, modifying the string in the method and verifying that the string fulfills all conditions in C#?

I've been doing C# now for about two months. And I want to create a method that does the following:
Takes a string.
Takes an array with conditions that needs to be applied to the string.
Modifies the string within the called method.
Checks if the modified string fulfills all boolean conditions.
Then "returns"(using the ref) string to the caller method.
So for example, if I wanted the user to input their first and last name. I'd do:
GetStringLine(out string name, new bool[] { name.Length > 1, name.Split(' ').Length > 1})
I've been trying several different ways at this point, I believe I am simply missing something. It feels like there should be some way to tell the method that the bool condition being passed into the method should be applied to the actively modified string.
Anyways, as I don't have a whole lot of experience with C#, or programming, I am hoping that the following code block will explain or hint further to what I am trying to achieve. Really hoping to get some more understanding of this. So keep in mind, I don't need to do it exactly as I am showing, if there would be a another way of accomplishing my goals, I'd be happy to do that instead.
Best regards!
static void Main(string[] args) {
string str = "test";
GetStringLine(ref str,
new bool[] {
str.Length > 1,
str.Length < 3
}
);
}
public static void GetStringLine(ref string str, bool[] conditions) {
while (!conditions.All(condition => condition)) {
str = Console.ReadLine();
Console.WriteLine("");
}
}
Edit:
After #pm100 's solution, I applied it as such and it works as expected:
public static void GetStringLine(out string output, Predicate<string>[] conditions) {
string input = "";
while (!conditions.All(condition => condition(input))) {
input = Console.ReadLine();
Console.WriteLine("");
}
output = input;
}
Although, I feel like it's a bit abundant due to the string input = "" and output = input. My first attempt was to do it like this:
public static void GetStringLine(out string output, Predicate<string>[] conditions) {
while (!conditions.All(condition => condition(output))) {
output = Console.ReadLine();
Console.WriteLine("");
}
}
Sadly, this yields me naught but two errors:
First:
CS1628 Cannot use ref, out, or in parameter 'output' inside an anonymous method,
lambda expression, query expression, or local function
Second:
CS0177 The out parameter 'output' must be assigned to before control
leaves the current method
I'll add that my actual code contains more fluff, I.e. error prompts and other things that are needed, but I deemed it not relevant to the current question at hand.
I leave out the looping to reprompt and just show the check against arbitrary conditions (since thats the tricky bit)
static bool CheckString(string input, Predicate<string>[] conditions) {
conditions.All(c => c(input))
}
now to use
var conditions = new Predicate<string>[] {
(s)=>s.Length > 3,
(s)=>s.Contains("a")
};
CheckString("abcdef", conditions); // true
CheckString("ab", conditions); // false
the hard part for you will be to tell the user on each reprompt what the conditions are. You cannot (easily) get a string representation of the predicates, probably should pass in a prompt string
Like this
static string ReadCheckedString(string prompt, Predicate<string>[] conditions) {
while (true) {
Console.WriteLine(prompt);
var input = Console.ReadLine();
if (input == null || input.Length == 0)
return null;
if (conditions.All(c => c(input))) {
return input;
}
}
}
and
var conditions = new Predicate<string>[] {
(s)=>s.Length > 3,
(s)=>s.Contains("a")
};
var ans = ReadCheckedString("longer than 3 chars and contains 'a'", conditions);

How do you check if a string contains abc?

static void Main(string[] args)
{
bool s = StringMethod("aBc");
Console.WriteLine(s);
}
public static Boolean StringMethod(String s)
{
if (s.ToUpper() != "abc".ToUpper() && s == " ")
{
return false;
}
else
return true;
}
The method must answer true if the receiving text includes "abc" or "ABC" or AbC" (Upper or Lower Case not important) and false otherwise.
Ex: The method receive "foabc". It answer true.
Ex: The method receive "iABCc". It answer true.
Ex: The method receive "aBCd". It answer true.
Ex: The method receive "aBdc". It answer false.
Any suggestions?
When comparing strings with other than a literal comparison, consider using overloads of the string class that take a StringComparison value or using a StringComparer to avoid creating unnecessary strings.
In your case, what you are looking for is something like this:
public static bool StringMethod(string s)
{
return s.IndexOf("abc", StringComparison.CurrentCultureIgnoreCase) >= 0;
}

C# - better ways to validate if a string is a number other than int.TryParse()?

I find myself often needing to use int.TryParse() to test if a value is an integer. However, when using TryParse, I have to pass a reference variable to the function. So I find myself always needing to create a temp int to be passed in. Usually it looks something like:
int my_temp_integer;
int.TryParse(potential_integer, my_temp_integer);
I find this to be quite cumbersome considering that all I want is a simple true/false response, and I don't care about the actual parsed result. Is there a better way to approach this? Why isn't there an overloaded function where I can just pass the value I want to test and get a true/false response?
Thanks.
you could write an extension method:
public static bool IsInt(this string pString)
{
int value;
return int.TryParse(pString, out value);
}
then your example becomes:
potential_integer.IsInt();
EDIT:
Lately I have been using a generic form of this.
public delegate bool TryParser<T>(string pString, out T pResult);
public static bool Is<T>(this string pString, TryParser<T> pTryParser)
{
T val;
return pTryParser(pString, out val);
}
Can then use it as follows; it's not perfect, but it's more concise than anything I've found:
"1234".Is<int>(int.TryParse); // true
"asdf123".Is<int>(int.TryParse); // false
"1.2345".Is<float>(float.TryParse); // true
"1000".Is<byte>(byte.TryParse); // false
Theoretically, this would also work with custom TryParse methods, as long as you followed the same pattern as the official ones.
Update: If you maintain a static dictionary of TryParse methods by type, you can avoid having to ever directly pass the method. The dictionary can even be populated as needed with reflection.
A simple solution is to create an extension method.
public static class StringExtensions {
public static bool IsInt(this string s) {
int i; return Int.TryParse(s, out i);
}
}
Then you just use it as so:
string s = "123";
if (s.IsInt())
// do something.
if you don't want to actually convert the string, only test it, then you can use Regex
something kinda like this (you may need to adjust this to fit your needs):
public bool IsInt(this string inputData)
{
Regex isNumber = new Regex(#"^\d+$");
Match m = isNumber.Match(inputData);
return m.Success;
}
You could use
bool isInt = str.TrimEnd( new char[] {'0','1','2','3','4','5','6','7','8','9'})
.Length == 0;
A shorter alternative to Muad'Dib above:
bool IsInt(string input)
{
return new System.Text.RegularExpressions.Regex(#"^\d$").IsMatch(input);
}
/Hans

Stuck with Parsing

Using VS2010 Express, C# and it's WinForms Application.
Here I have three text boxes(aTextBox, bTextBox, cTextBox) from which Inputs are strings and then using int.Parse(aTextBox.Text) converted to integers.
Then a Button (calcBtn) method which is going to calculate charges and then to display results after some maths to particular TextBoxes on Result groupBox which again contains text boxes for results...
The problem is causing by the way I am parsing or the order in which it's executing. If any of the textbox is filled then result should display and not to get in the format exceptions. Here I am getting stuck because inside the calcBtn I am parsing all text boxes and if one of them is empty then exception occurs. Compiler is I guess trying to parse empty strings from the empty text boxes, and I don't want it to be.
Any suggestions if you got what I mean? :)
Here's what GUI looks like
You can use the extended method...
1) method
public static class TE
{
public static int StringToInt(this string x)
{
int result;
return int.TryParse(x, out result) ? result : 0;
}
}
2) use
System.Windows.Forms.TextBox t = new System.Windows.Forms.TextBox();
int x = t.Text.StringToInt();
The Int32.Parse method does not accept malformed strings, and this includes empty strings. I have two suggestions.
You could check if the string is empty/whitespace first, and return 0 or some other default value:
private static int ParseInteger(string str)
{
if (str == null || str.Trim() == "")
return 0;
// On .NET 4 you could use this instead. Prior .NET versions do not
// have the IsNullOrWhiteSpace method.
//
// if (String.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(str))
// return 0;
return Int32.Parse(str);
}
Or you could simply ignore all parsing errors, treating them as 0. This will treat things like "", "123abc", and "foobar" as zero.
private static int ParseInteger(string str)
{
int value;
if (Int32.TryParse(str, out value))
return value;
return 0;
}
Which approach you take depends on the specific needs of your application.
You can simply do:
private static int ParseInteger(string str)
{
int value;
Int32.TryParse(str, out value);
return value;
}
without any if, since TryParse set value to 0 if it fails

Identify if a string is a number

If I have these strings:
"abc" = false
"123" = true
"ab2" = false
Is there a command, like IsNumeric() or something else, that can identify if a string is a valid number?
int n;
bool isNumeric = int.TryParse("123", out n);
Update As of C# 7:
var isNumeric = int.TryParse("123", out int n);
or if you don't need the number you can discard the out parameter
var isNumeric = int.TryParse("123", out _);
The var s can be replaced by their respective types!
This will return true if input is all numbers. Don't know if it's any better than TryParse, but it will work.
Regex.IsMatch(input, #"^\d+$")
If you just want to know if it has one or more numbers mixed in with characters, leave off the ^ + and $.
Regex.IsMatch(input, #"\d")
Edit:
Actually I think it is better than TryParse because a very long string could potentially overflow TryParse.
You can also use:
using System.Linq;
stringTest.All(char.IsDigit);
It will return true for all Numeric Digits (not float) and false if input string is any sort of alphanumeric.
Test case
Return value
Test result
"1234"
true
✅Pass
"1"
true
✅Pass
"0"
true
✅Pass
""
true
⚠️Fail (known edge case)
"12.34"
false
✅Pass
"+1234"
false
✅Pass
"-13"
false
✅Pass
"3E14"
false
✅Pass
"0x10"
false
✅Pass
Please note: stringTest should not be an empty string as this would pass the test of being numeric.
I've used this function several times:
public static bool IsNumeric(object Expression)
{
double retNum;
bool isNum = Double.TryParse(Convert.ToString(Expression), System.Globalization.NumberStyles.Any, System.Globalization.NumberFormatInfo.InvariantInfo, out retNum);
return isNum;
}
But you can also use;
bool b1 = Microsoft.VisualBasic.Information.IsNumeric("1"); //true
bool b2 = Microsoft.VisualBasic.Information.IsNumeric("1aa"); // false
From Benchmarking IsNumeric Options
(source: aspalliance.com)
(source: aspalliance.com)
This is probably the best option in C#.
If you want to know if the string contains a whole number (integer):
string someString;
// ...
int myInt;
bool isNumerical = int.TryParse(someString, out myInt);
The TryParse method will try to convert the string to a number (integer) and if it succeeds it will return true and place the corresponding number in myInt. If it can't, it returns false.
Solutions using the int.Parse(someString) alternative shown in other responses works, but it is much slower because throwing exceptions is very expensive. TryParse(...) was added to the C# language in version 2, and until then you didn't have a choice. Now you do: you should therefore avoid the Parse() alternative.
If you want to accept decimal numbers, the decimal class also has a .TryParse(...) method. Replace int with decimal in the above discussion, and the same principles apply.
You can always use the built in TryParse methods for many datatypes to see if the string in question will pass.
Example.
decimal myDec;
var Result = decimal.TryParse("123", out myDec);
Result would then = True
decimal myDec;
var Result = decimal.TryParse("abc", out myDec);
Result would then = False
In case you don't want to use int.Parse or double.Parse, you can roll your own with something like this:
public static class Extensions
{
public static bool IsNumeric(this string s)
{
foreach (char c in s)
{
if (!char.IsDigit(c) && c != '.')
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
}
If you want to catch a broader spectrum of numbers, à la PHP's is_numeric, you can use the following:
// From PHP documentation for is_numeric
// (http://php.net/manual/en/function.is-numeric.php)
// Finds whether the given variable is numeric.
// Numeric strings consist of optional sign, any number of digits, optional decimal part and optional
// exponential part. Thus +0123.45e6 is a valid numeric value.
// Hexadecimal (e.g. 0xf4c3b00c), Binary (e.g. 0b10100111001), Octal (e.g. 0777) notation is allowed too but
// only without sign, decimal and exponential part.
static readonly Regex _isNumericRegex =
new Regex( "^(" +
/*Hex*/ #"0x[0-9a-f]+" + "|" +
/*Bin*/ #"0b[01]+" + "|" +
/*Oct*/ #"0[0-7]*" + "|" +
/*Dec*/ #"((?!0)|[-+]|(?=0+\.))(\d*\.)?\d+(e\d+)?" +
")$" );
static bool IsNumeric( string value )
{
return _isNumericRegex.IsMatch( value );
}
Unit Test:
static void IsNumericTest()
{
string[] l_unitTests = new string[] {
"123", /* TRUE */
"abc", /* FALSE */
"12.3", /* TRUE */
"+12.3", /* TRUE */
"-12.3", /* TRUE */
"1.23e2", /* TRUE */
"-1e23", /* TRUE */
"1.2ef", /* FALSE */
"0x0", /* TRUE */
"0xfff", /* TRUE */
"0xf1f", /* TRUE */
"0xf1g", /* FALSE */
"0123", /* TRUE */
"0999", /* FALSE (not octal) */
"+0999", /* TRUE (forced decimal) */
"0b0101", /* TRUE */
"0b0102" /* FALSE */
};
foreach ( string l_unitTest in l_unitTests )
Console.WriteLine( l_unitTest + " => " + IsNumeric( l_unitTest ).ToString() );
Console.ReadKey( true );
}
Keep in mind that just because a value is numeric doesn't mean it can be converted to a numeric type. For example, "999999999999999999999999999999.9999999999" is a perfeclty valid numeric value, but it won't fit into a .NET numeric type (not one defined in the standard library, that is).
I know this is an old thread, but none of the answers really did it for me - either inefficient, or not encapsulated for easy reuse. I also wanted to ensure it returned false if the string was empty or null. TryParse returns true in this case (an empty string does not cause an error when parsing as a number). So, here's my string extension method:
public static class Extensions
{
/// <summary>
/// Returns true if string is numeric and not empty or null or whitespace.
/// Determines if string is numeric by parsing as Double
/// </summary>
/// <param name="str"></param>
/// <param name="style">Optional style - defaults to NumberStyles.Number (leading and trailing whitespace, leading and trailing sign, decimal point and thousands separator) </param>
/// <param name="culture">Optional CultureInfo - defaults to InvariantCulture</param>
/// <returns></returns>
public static bool IsNumeric(this string str, NumberStyles style = NumberStyles.Number,
CultureInfo culture = null)
{
double num;
if (culture == null) culture = CultureInfo.InvariantCulture;
return Double.TryParse(str, style, culture, out num) && !String.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(str);
}
}
Simple to use:
var mystring = "1234.56789";
var test = mystring.IsNumeric();
Or, if you want to test other types of number, you can specify the 'style'.
So, to convert a number with an Exponent, you could use:
var mystring = "5.2453232E6";
var test = mystring.IsNumeric(style: NumberStyles.AllowExponent);
Or to test a potential Hex string, you could use:
var mystring = "0xF67AB2";
var test = mystring.IsNumeric(style: NumberStyles.HexNumber)
The optional 'culture' parameter can be used in much the same way.
It is limited by not being able to convert strings that are too big to be contained in a double, but that is a limited requirement and I think if you are working with numbers larger than this, then you'll probably need additional specialised number handling functions anyway.
UPDATE of Kunal Noel Answer
stringTest.All(char.IsDigit);
// This returns true if all characters of the string are digits.
But, for this case we have that empty strings will pass that test, so, you can:
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(stringTest) && stringTest.All(char.IsDigit)){
// Do your logic here
}
You can use TryParse to determine if the string can be parsed into an integer.
int i;
bool bNum = int.TryParse(str, out i);
The boolean will tell you if it worked or not.
If you want to know if a string is a number, you could always try parsing it:
var numberString = "123";
int number;
int.TryParse(numberString , out number);
Note that TryParse returns a bool, which you can use to check if your parsing succeeded.
I guess this answer will just be lost in between all the other ones, but anyway, here goes.
I ended up on this question via Google because I wanted to check if a string was numeric so that I could just use double.Parse("123") instead of the TryParse() method.
Why? Because it's annoying to have to declare an out variable and check the result of TryParse() before you know if the parse failed or not. I want to use the ternary operator to check if the string is numerical and then just parse it in the first ternary expression or provide a default value in the second ternary expression.
Like this:
var doubleValue = IsNumeric(numberAsString) ? double.Parse(numberAsString) : 0;
It's just a lot cleaner than:
var doubleValue = 0;
if (double.TryParse(numberAsString, out doubleValue)) {
//whatever you want to do with doubleValue
}
I made a couple extension methods for these cases:
Extension method one
public static bool IsParseableAs<TInput>(this string value) {
var type = typeof(TInput);
var tryParseMethod = type.GetMethod("TryParse", BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Public, Type.DefaultBinder,
new[] { typeof(string), type.MakeByRefType() }, null);
if (tryParseMethod == null) return false;
var arguments = new[] { value, Activator.CreateInstance(type) };
return (bool) tryParseMethod.Invoke(null, arguments);
}
Example:
"123".IsParseableAs<double>() ? double.Parse(sNumber) : 0;
Because IsParseableAs() tries to parse the string as the appropriate type instead of just checking if the string is "numeric" it should be pretty safe. And you can even use it for non numeric types that have a TryParse() method, like DateTime.
The method uses reflection and you end up calling the TryParse() method twice which, of course, isn't as efficient, but not everything has to be fully optimized, sometimes convenience is just more important.
This method can also be used to easily parse a list of numeric strings into a list of double or some other type with a default value without having to catch any exceptions:
var sNumbers = new[] {"10", "20", "30"};
var dValues = sNumbers.Select(s => s.IsParseableAs<double>() ? double.Parse(s) : 0);
Extension method two
public static TOutput ParseAs<TOutput>(this string value, TOutput defaultValue) {
var type = typeof(TOutput);
var tryParseMethod = type.GetMethod("TryParse", BindingFlags.Static | BindingFlags.Public, Type.DefaultBinder,
new[] { typeof(string), type.MakeByRefType() }, null);
if (tryParseMethod == null) return defaultValue;
var arguments = new object[] { value, null };
return ((bool) tryParseMethod.Invoke(null, arguments)) ? (TOutput) arguments[1] : defaultValue;
}
This extension method lets you parse a string as any type that has a TryParse() method and it also lets you specify a default value to return if the conversion fails.
This is better than using the ternary operator with the extension method above as it only does the conversion once. It still uses reflection though...
Examples:
"123".ParseAs<int>(10);
"abc".ParseAs<int>(25);
"123,78".ParseAs<double>(10);
"abc".ParseAs<double>(107.4);
"2014-10-28".ParseAs<DateTime>(DateTime.MinValue);
"monday".ParseAs<DateTime>(DateTime.MinValue);
Outputs:
123
25
123,78
107,4
28.10.2014 00:00:00
01.01.0001 00:00:00
If you want to check if a string is a number (I'm assuming it's a string since if it's a number, duh, you know it's one).
Without regex and
using Microsoft's code as much as possible
you could also do:
public static bool IsNumber(this string aNumber)
{
BigInteger temp_big_int;
var is_number = BigInteger.TryParse(aNumber, out temp_big_int);
return is_number;
}
This will take care of the usual nasties:
Minus (-) or Plus (+) in the beginning
contains decimal character BigIntegers won't parse numbers with decimal points. (So: BigInteger.Parse("3.3") will throw an exception, and TryParse for the same will return false)
no funny non-digits
covers cases where the number is bigger than the usual use of Double.TryParse
You'll have to add a reference to System.Numerics and have
using System.Numerics; on top of your class (well, the second is a bonus I guess :)
Double.TryParse
bool Double.TryParse(string s, out double result)
The best flexible solution with .net built-in function called- char.IsDigit. It works with unlimited long numbers. It will only return true if each character is a numeric number. I used it lot of times with no issues and much easily cleaner solution I ever found. I made a example method.Its ready to use. In addition I added validation for null and empty input. So the method is now totally bulletproof
public static bool IsNumeric(string strNumber)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(strNumber))
{
return false;
}
else
{
int numberOfChar = strNumber.Count();
if (numberOfChar > 0)
{
bool r = strNumber.All(char.IsDigit);
return r;
}
else
{
return false;
}
}
}
Try the regex define below
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("6") // false
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("68ab") // false
new Regex(#"^\d{4}").IsMatch("1111abcdefg")
new Regex(#"^\d+").IsMatch("6") // true (any length but at least one digit)
With c# 7 it you can inline the out variable:
if(int.TryParse(str, out int v))
{
}
Use these extension methods to clearly distinguish between a check if the string is numerical and if the string only contains 0-9 digits
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
/// <summary>
/// Returns true if string could represent a valid number, including decimals and local culture symbols
/// </summary>
public static bool IsNumeric(this string s)
{
decimal d;
return decimal.TryParse(s, System.Globalization.NumberStyles.Any, System.Globalization.CultureInfo.CurrentCulture, out d);
}
/// <summary>
/// Returns true only if string is wholy comprised of numerical digits
/// </summary>
public static bool IsNumbersOnly(this string s)
{
if (s == null || s == string.Empty)
return false;
foreach (char c in s)
{
if (c < '0' || c > '9') // Avoid using .IsDigit or .IsNumeric as they will return true for other characters
return false;
}
return true;
}
}
public static bool IsNumeric(this string input)
{
int n;
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(input)) //.Replace('.',null).Replace(',',null)
{
foreach (var i in input)
{
if (!int.TryParse(i.ToString(), out n))
{
return false;
}
}
return true;
}
return false;
}
Regex rx = new Regex(#"^([1-9]\d*(\.)\d*|0?(\.)\d*[1-9]\d*|[1-9]\d*)$");
string text = "12.0";
var result = rx.IsMatch(text);
Console.WriteLine(result);
To check string is uint, ulong or contains only digits one .(dot) and digits
Sample inputs
123 => True
123.1 => True
0.123 => True
.123 => True
0.2 => True
3452.434.43=> False
2342f43.34 => False
svasad.324 => False
3215.afa => False
Hope this helps
string myString = "abc";
double num;
bool isNumber = double.TryParse(myString , out num);
if isNumber
{
//string is number
}
else
{
//string is not a number
}
Pull in a reference to Visual Basic in your project and use its Information.IsNumeric method such as shown below and be able to capture floats as well as integers unlike the answer above which only catches ints.
// Using Microsoft.VisualBasic;
var txt = "ABCDEFG";
if (Information.IsNumeric(txt))
Console.WriteLine ("Numeric");
IsNumeric("12.3"); // true
IsNumeric("1"); // true
IsNumeric("abc"); // false
All the Answers are Useful. But while searching for a solution where the Numeric value is 12 digits or more (in my case), then while debugging, I found the following solution useful :
double tempInt = 0;
bool result = double.TryParse("Your_12_Digit_Or_more_StringValue", out tempInt);
Th result variable will give you true or false.
Here is the C# method.
Int.TryParse Method (String, Int32)
bool is_number(string str, char delimiter = '.')
{
if(str.Length==0) //Empty
{
return false;
}
bool is_delimetered = false;
foreach (char c in str)
{
if ((c < '0' || c > '9') && (c != delimiter)) //ASCII table check. Not a digit && not delimeter
{
return false;
}
if (c == delimiter)
{
if (is_delimetered) //more than 1 delimiter
{
return false;
}
else //first time delimiter
{
is_delimetered = true;
}
}
}
return true;
}

Categories