Question

Possible Duplicate:
What is wrong in comparing a null with an object rather than an object with a null

I see some developers using the following null object checking in C#:

if (null == myObject)
{

}

rather than:

if (myObject == null)
{

}

I prefer the second statement, since it reads naturally (for me) from left to right.

Is there any reason for why the first one would be used? Are there any performance benefits, or is it purely taste?

Answer 1

Some people (Mostly C developers) prefer the first way because if you forget one = sign the code wont compile in C.

For example, when i forget one =;

int a = 0;

if(a=1) //Accidental assignment, luckily the C# compiler warns us for this. The C compiler wouldnt.
{

}    
if(1=a) // This is not logical, and not valid in either C# or C.
{

}

However as Jamietre pointed out that unlike C its invalid in C# to implicitly cast an int to a boolean. The compiler still produces an error. It will however work when you compare booleans as such: if(a == true). However that in itself is rather odd, as you can (and should in my opinion) omit the == true.