在事件声明中添加匿名空委托有缺点吗?

Is there a downside to adding an anonymous empty delegate on event declaration?(在事件声明中添加匿名空委托有缺点吗?)

问题描述

我看到有人提到过这个成语(包括关于 SO):

I have seen a few mentions of this idiom (including on SO):

// Deliberately empty subscriber
public event EventHandler AskQuestion = delegate {};

好处很明显 - 它避免了在引发事件之前检查 null 的需要.

The upside is clear - it avoids the need to check for null before raising the event.

但是，我很想知道是否有任何缺点.例如，它是否被广泛使用并且足够透明以至于不会引起维护问题?空事件订阅者调用是否有任何明显的性能影响?

However, I am keen to understand if there are any downsides. For example, is it something that is in widespread use and is transparent enough that it won't cause a maintenance headache? Is there any appreciable performance hit of the empty event subscriber call?

推荐答案

唯一的缺点是非常轻微的性能损失，因为您调用了额外的空委托.除此之外，没有维护费用或其他缺点.

The only downside is a very slight performance penalty as you are calling extra empty delegate. Other than that there is no maintenance penalty or other drawback.

这篇关于在事件声明中添加匿名空委托有缺点吗?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持编程学习网！