In c# difference between (user==null) and (null==user) [duplicate]

Answer 1

No, both are equal

Answer 2

it comes from C

You could easily write if(user=null) by mistake with only one = sign which instead of comparing assigns null to user and then tests the value of null.

If you wrote it as "if (NULL == user)" then you got a compiler error if you accidentally only wrote one =

I never liked it, it was as mistake I rarely made, and if I did it usually got caught first time I ran the program. But it made code in my opinion MUCH harder to read.

In c# there is no reason other than habit.

Answer 3

I think that null == user is an best practice in C/C++ world.

It prevents typos like:

if (user = null) {

to happening, since they pass silently and they are very dangerous. Using null = user is safer in C/C++ (but not in C# since the compiler will complain) since the compiler cannot compile it.

Answer 4

As far as I know...

null == object would be a reference comparison. object == null may be overloaded.

Answer 5

It just makes more logical sense to do:

if (user == null)

as it is the user you are evaluating, you are just using null as a comparison.

Answer 6

No deference between the two statements, they are equal. And that's related to the way that the developer used to write the code.