Reputation:
this.value1
and c.value1
can both be either null or non-null. So a total of 4 combinations to test. value2
can also be null or non-null.
Can the if-then-else's below be replaced by something shorter like use the ternary operator ( if then else using the ? :
operators) - and would that be a bad practice for this specific case because we are testing 4 combinations for value1
and value2
?
public override bool Equals(object obj)
{
bool value1_check = false;
bool value2_check = false;
var c = obj as ObjectType;
if (this.value1 != null)
value1_check = this.value1.Equals(c.value1);
else if ((this.value1 == null) && (c.value1 == null))
value1_check = true;
else if ((this.value1 == null) && (c.value1 != null))
value1_check = c.value1.Equals(this.value1);
if (this.value2 != null)
value2_check = this.value2.Equals(c.value2);
else if ((this.value2 == null) && (c.value2 == null))
value2_check = true;
else if ((this.value2 == null) && (c.value2 != null))
value2_check = c.value2.Equals(this.value2);
return (value1_check && value2_check);
}
Upvotes: 4
Views: 1190
Reputation: 135
If your still wondering about the ternary option.
value1_check= this.value1!=null? this.value1.Equals(c.value1):(c.value1!=null?c.value.Equals(this.value):value1_check=true);
Upvotes: 0
Reputation: 136104
Actually, you might want the ?? Operator.
var lhs= this.value1 ?? c.value1 ?? null;
var rhs = c.value1 ?? this.value1 ?? null;
var value1Check = lhs == rhs
Should do the same thing as yours, but almost 100% less readable!
Upvotes: 4
Reputation: 887385
You can call Object.Equals()
, which already does all that.
return Equals(this.Value1, c.Value1)
&& Equals(this.Value2, c.Value2);
Upvotes: 8