在事件声明中添加匿名空委托是否有缺点？ [英] Is there a downside to adding an anonymous empty delegate on event declaration?

问题描述

我已经看到这个成语的一些提及（包括在SO ）：

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

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

上行空间很清楚 - 它避免了在提出事件之前检查null。

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，它是广泛使用的东西，透明度足以赢得不会导致维护头痛吗？空事件用户电话是否有明显的表现？

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，调用额外的空委托。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是否有缺点？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IT屋！