Hi, IMO, change your convention. This mistake is only possible in C# if foo is a boolean, but in that case you shouldn't even be doing this to begin with, but just a simple if (foo) or whatever.
Regards, Alex On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Vlad <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I have coding habits that come from C which seem to be violating some > C# style guideline. > > I prefer writing: > > if (null == foo) > { > DoStuff(); > } > > But it seems the rule does not consider the above as good a null check > as > > if (foo == null) > > Which I consider bad because it is all too easy to drop an =. C# only > allows Booleans to be there, so should I change my convention?. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Gendarme" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/gendarme?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gendarme" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/gendarme?hl=en.
