From what I gathered with the new null operator in C# 6.0 you can do something like this:
string name = people.FirstOrDefault()?.FullName;
And this is great, but one verification I often come across is something like this:
object name = null;
if(name != null) {
DoSomething();
} else {
DoSomethingElse();
}
Given the purpose of the new null operator, I would like something like this should be possible:
if(name?) {
DoSomething();
} else {
DoSomethingElse();
}
The problem here from what I understood is that when the value the ? is checking is in fact null, it returns null, and you need a bool condition for the if statement. Since you can't directly convert a null to a bool, is there a simpler way of checking this without doing if(name != null) using the new null operator in C# 6.0?
There's no point in doing this. You're not doing any null coalescing in your example - you're simply checking for null.
A better use would be if you wanted to check some member of the name object. For example:
if (name?.FirstName != null) ...
But as you can see, it's still a simple comparison for null - we just used null coalescing to avoid having to write something like this:
if (name != null && name.FirstName != null) ...
Related
With C# 6.0 in the VS2015 preview we have a new operator, ?., which can be used like this:
public class A {
string PropertyOfA { get; set; }
}
...
var a = new A();
var foo = "bar";
if(a?.PropertyOfA != foo) {
//somecode
}
What exactly does it do?
It's the null conditional operator. It basically means:
"Evaluate the first operand; if that's null, stop, with a result of null. Otherwise, evaluate the second operand (as a member access of the first operand)."
In your example, the point is that if a is null, then a?.PropertyOfA will evaluate to null rather than throwing an exception - it will then compare that null reference with foo (using string's == overload), find they're not equal and execution will go into the body of the if statement.
In other words, it's like this:
string bar = (a == null ? null : a.PropertyOfA);
if (bar != foo)
{
...
}
... except that a is only evaluated once.
Note that this can change the type of the expression, too. For example, consider FileInfo.Length. That's a property of type long, but if you use it with the null conditional operator, you end up with an expression of type long?:
FileInfo fi = ...; // fi could be null
long? length = fi?.Length; // If fi is null, length will be null
It can be very useful when flattening a hierarchy and/or mapping objects. Instead of:
if (Model.Model2 == null
|| Model.Model2.Model3 == null
|| Model.Model2.Model3.Model4 == null
|| Model.Model2.Model3.Model4.Name == null)
{
mapped.Name = "N/A"
}
else
{
mapped.Name = Model.Model2.Model3.Model4.Name;
}
It can be written like (same logic as above)
mapped.Name = Model.Model2?.Model3?.Model4?.Name ?? "N/A";
DotNetFiddle.Net Working Example.
(the ?? or null-coalescing operator is different than the ? or null conditional operator).
It can also be used out side of assignment operators with Action. Instead of
Action<TValue> myAction = null;
if (myAction != null)
{
myAction(TValue);
}
It can be simplified to:
myAction?.Invoke(TValue);
DotNetFiddle Example:
using System;
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
Action<string> consoleWrite = null;
consoleWrite?.Invoke("Test 1");
consoleWrite = (s) => Console.WriteLine(s);
consoleWrite?.Invoke("Test 2");
}
}
Result:
Test 2
Basically, I have applied ?. operator after Model as well. I am trying to know that whether it can be applied directly to the model or does it only work with the navigation properties?
The ? or null conditional operator operators on the left value, regardless of the type of value. And the compiler doesn't care what the value is on the right. It's simple compiler magic (meaning it does something you can already do, just in a simplified why).
For example
var a = model?.Value;
is the same as saying
var a = model == null ? null : model.Value;
In the second case the evaluation of checking for null has no associate with the value returned. The null conditional operator basically just always return null if the left value is null.
The type of member (Method, Field, Property, Constructor) .Value is irrelevant.
The reason your DotNetFiddle example doesn't work is because the compiler being use for the .Net 4.7.2 isn't compatible with the c# version that support the null conditional operator. Changing it to .Net 5, works:
https://dotnetfiddle.net/7EWoO5
This is relatively new to C# which makes it easy for us to call the functions with respect to the null or non-null values in method chaining.
old way to achieve the same thing was:
var functionCaller = this.member;
if (functionCaller!= null)
functionCaller.someFunction(var someParam);
and now it has been made much easier with just:
member?.someFunction(var someParam);
I strongly recommend this doc page.
With C# 6.0 in the VS2015 preview we have a new operator, ?., which can be used like this:
public class A {
string PropertyOfA { get; set; }
}
...
var a = new A();
var foo = "bar";
if(a?.PropertyOfA != foo) {
//somecode
}
What exactly does it do?
It's the null conditional operator. It basically means:
"Evaluate the first operand; if that's null, stop, with a result of null. Otherwise, evaluate the second operand (as a member access of the first operand)."
In your example, the point is that if a is null, then a?.PropertyOfA will evaluate to null rather than throwing an exception - it will then compare that null reference with foo (using string's == overload), find they're not equal and execution will go into the body of the if statement.
In other words, it's like this:
string bar = (a == null ? null : a.PropertyOfA);
if (bar != foo)
{
...
}
... except that a is only evaluated once.
Note that this can change the type of the expression, too. For example, consider FileInfo.Length. That's a property of type long, but if you use it with the null conditional operator, you end up with an expression of type long?:
FileInfo fi = ...; // fi could be null
long? length = fi?.Length; // If fi is null, length will be null
It can be very useful when flattening a hierarchy and/or mapping objects. Instead of:
if (Model.Model2 == null
|| Model.Model2.Model3 == null
|| Model.Model2.Model3.Model4 == null
|| Model.Model2.Model3.Model4.Name == null)
{
mapped.Name = "N/A"
}
else
{
mapped.Name = Model.Model2.Model3.Model4.Name;
}
It can be written like (same logic as above)
mapped.Name = Model.Model2?.Model3?.Model4?.Name ?? "N/A";
DotNetFiddle.Net Working Example.
(the ?? or null-coalescing operator is different than the ? or null conditional operator).
It can also be used out side of assignment operators with Action. Instead of
Action<TValue> myAction = null;
if (myAction != null)
{
myAction(TValue);
}
It can be simplified to:
myAction?.Invoke(TValue);
DotNetFiddle Example:
using System;
public class Program
{
public static void Main()
{
Action<string> consoleWrite = null;
consoleWrite?.Invoke("Test 1");
consoleWrite = (s) => Console.WriteLine(s);
consoleWrite?.Invoke("Test 2");
}
}
Result:
Test 2
Basically, I have applied ?. operator after Model as well. I am trying to know that whether it can be applied directly to the model or does it only work with the navigation properties?
The ? or null conditional operator operators on the left value, regardless of the type of value. And the compiler doesn't care what the value is on the right. It's simple compiler magic (meaning it does something you can already do, just in a simplified why).
For example
var a = model?.Value;
is the same as saying
var a = model == null ? null : model.Value;
In the second case the evaluation of checking for null has no associate with the value returned. The null conditional operator basically just always return null if the left value is null.
The type of member (Method, Field, Property, Constructor) .Value is irrelevant.
The reason your DotNetFiddle example doesn't work is because the compiler being use for the .Net 4.7.2 isn't compatible with the c# version that support the null conditional operator. Changing it to .Net 5, works:
https://dotnetfiddle.net/7EWoO5
This is relatively new to C# which makes it easy for us to call the functions with respect to the null or non-null values in method chaining.
old way to achieve the same thing was:
var functionCaller = this.member;
if (functionCaller!= null)
functionCaller.someFunction(var someParam);
and now it has been made much easier with just:
member?.someFunction(var someParam);
I strongly recommend this doc page.
What is the fastest way (in terms of minimizing the amount of code statements) to get a property from an object after checking that the object isn't null?
string s = null;
if (null != myObject)
{
s = myObject.propertyName;
}
For reference: Wait for future C# 6.0 feature for null checking with possible ?. syntax:
string result = obj?.ToString();
For now: Use ternary operator:
string result = obj != null ? obj.ToString() : null;
C# does not have a null-propagating operator (although it has been discussed a few times). Frankly, "faster" is not likely to be a factor here, as it will typically end up in the same (or similar enough) IL, but I tend to use:
string s = myObject == null ? null : myObject.PropertyName;
the situation you describe is only one scenario where the operator is useful. It's also handy to replace constructs like this:
if (value != null)
{
return value;
}
else
{
return otherValue;
}
Or
return value != null ? value : otherValue;
with
return value ?? otherValue;
I have a class with a string property. I use the coalesce operator when reading from it as it might be null, but it still throws me an NullRefrenceExeption.
string name = user.Section.ParentSection.Name ?? string.Empty;
To be more specific, its the ".ParentSection" that's null so is it because it don't even have ".name" ? If that's the case should i test ".ParentSection" first with an if block?
I assume there are something about the Coalesce operator i dont understand, hope someone can shed some light on whats going wrong here.
To be more specific, its the ".ParentSection" that's null so is it
because it don't even have ".name" ?
Yes.
If that's the case should i test ".ParentSection" first with an if
block?
Yes.
You'll need to check if Section and ParentSection are null. You could use an if-statement for this or write an extension method like this:
public static class MaybeMonad
{
public static TOut With<TIn, TOut>(this TIn input, Func<TIn, TOut> evaluator)
where TIn : class
where TOut : class
{
if (input == null)
{
return null;
}
else
{
return evaluator(input);
}
}
}
You would use this method like so:
string name = user.With(u => u.Section)
.With(s => s.ParentSection)
.With(p => p.Name) ?? string.Empty;
I think it's a lot cleaner than an if-statement with a lot of &&.
Some further reading: http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/109026/Chained-null-checks-and-the-Maybe-monad
You need to check if user, user.Section, or user.Section.ParentSection are null before you can use the null coalescing operator on a property of user.Section.ParentSection.
Nested property access is not safe if any of the objects accessed are null this will throw a NullReferenceException. You will have to explicitly test for the outer objects to be not null.
E.g.:
string name = string.Empty;
if(user!=null && user.Section!=null && user.Section.ParentSection !=null)
name = user.Section.ParentSection.Name ?? string.Empty;
In general I would try to avoid nested access to properties, you are violating the Law of Demeter. Some refactoring might make this unnecessary in the first place.
The ?? operator checks if the left side is null and if so returns the right one, if not the left one.
In your case the left-side is the "Name" property in the object user.Section.ParentSection and this is null.
In those cases either think on what might be null or do something like this:
string name = user == null
|| user.Section == null
|| user.ParentSection == null
|| user.Section.ParentSection.Name == null
? string.Empty
: user.Section.ParentSection.Name;
(yeah it's ugly I know)
Chances are user or user.Section or user.Section.ParentSection is a null value.
The ?? operator doesn't prevent checks like:
if (user != null && user.Section != null && user.Section.ParentSection != null){
Make sure that everything up to the string property is valid and exists, then you can use ??. You can't call (null).Name, no matter how many times you try.
Yes you need to check if Section or ParentSection are null before you check Name
It is probably best to do something like this:
if(user!=null && user.Section!=null && user.Section.ParentSection!=null)
{
string name = user.Section.ParentSection.Name ?? string.Empty;
}
The null coalescing operator takes a statement like:
a = b ?? c;
What this says is "evaluate b; if it has a non-null value then assign that to a. Otherwise assign the value of c to a".
However within your b you're using a user object which may be null that has a section object that may be null that has a parent section property that may be null that had a name property that may be null. If you wanted to check all of these (and typically you should) then you can do something like:
string name = string.Empty;
if (user != null &&
user.Section != null &&
user.Section.ParentSection != null)
{
name = user.Section.ParentSection.Name ?? string.Empty;
}
As soon as the IF check fails it will not check further and therefore you don't get a NullReferenceException when you assume an object is present and then try to access one of its properties.
I have a string named ds and need to test only if it is null or not. Can I just do the following?
if (ds) { }
It passes a syntax check so I am wondering what conditions this would test as true.
what does the above code do?
String.IsNullOrEmpty will check to see if the string is empty or null.
if( !string.IsNullOrEmpty( ds)) {
// String is valid
}
There isn't a different way:
if (ds == null)
However there are useful methods for assignment operation:
MyClass a;
MyClass b = null;
a = b ?? new MyClass();
This will assign b to a if b is not null, otherwise will assign new MyClass() to a
So to check if a string is null (and only null)
if (ds == null)
otherwise you can use
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(ds))
or
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(ds))
If it is a string you might want to use the IsNullOrEmpty method
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.string.isnullorempty.aspx
It is, of course, short for
result = s == null || s == String.Empty;