C# : 'is' keyword and checking for Not

310
votes

This is a silly question, but you can use this code to check if something is a particular type...

if (child is IContainer) { //....

Is there a more elegant way to check for the "NOT" instance?

if (!(child is IContainer)) { //A little ugly... silly, yes I know...

//these don't work :)
if (child !is IContainer) {
if (child isnt IContainer) { 
if (child aint IContainer) { 
if (child isnotafreaking IContainer) {

Yes, yes... silly question....

Because there is some question on what the code looks like, it's just a simple return at the start of a method.

public void Update(DocumentPart part) {
    part.Update();
    if (!(DocumentPart is IContainer)) { return; }
    foreach(DocumentPart child in ((IContainer)part).Children) {
       //...etc...
13
c#castingkeyword
I personally like the "child isnotafreaking ...". I'm voting to have that keyword put into C# 5 - Joseph
I'm interested to know the situation you'd use this? What does the "else" part of this code look like and can't you just invert the test? If your code is saying "if child isn't an IContainer then throw exceptions" or "if child isn't an IContainer then maybe it's an IFoo so I'll try that next" then isn't there an implied else statement there? I'm probably missing something. - Martin Peck
@MartinPeck, there might not be an else clause. That's the reason I searched for this. - Joshua Walsh
@MartinPeck here's a sample: if (!(argument is MapsControlViewModel vm)) { return; } - I could invert the if and put the whoooole rest of the method inside the if's brackets, but then I'd get Christmas-tree code, with a lot of closing brackets at the end of the method. That's much less readable. - ANeves
maybe what we need in general are ifnot statements - Dave Cousineau

13 Answers

320
votes
if(!(child is IContainer))

is the only operator to go (there's no IsNot operator).

You can build an extension method that does it:

public static bool IsA<T>(this object obj) {
    return obj is T;
}

and then use it to:

if (!child.IsA<IContainer>())

And you could follow on your theme:

public static bool IsNotAFreaking<T>(this object obj) {
    return !(obj is T);
}

if (child.IsNotAFreaking<IContainer>()) { // ...

Update (considering the OP's code snippet):

Since you're actually casting the value afterward, you could just use as instead:

public void Update(DocumentPart part) {
    part.Update();
    IContainer containerPart = part as IContainer;
    if(containerPart == null) return;
    foreach(DocumentPart child in containerPart.Children) { // omit the cast.
       //...etc...
113
votes

You can do it this way:

object a = new StreamWriter("c:\\temp\\test.txt");

if (a is TextReader == false)
{
   Console.WriteLine("failed");
}
35
votes

This hasn't been mentioned yet. It works and I think it looks better than using !(child is IContainer)

if (part is IContainer is false)
{
    return;
}

New In C# 9.0

https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/welcome-to-c-9-0/#logical-patterns

if (part is not IContainer)
{
    return;
}
15
votes

C# 9 (released with .NET 5) includes the logical patterns and, or and not, which allows us to write this more elegantly:

if (child is not IContainer) { ... }

Likewise, this pattern can be used to check for null:

if (child is not null) { ... }
10
votes

Why not just use the else ?

if (child is IContainer)
{
  //
}
else
{
  // Do what you want here
}

Its neat it familiar and simple ?

10
votes

The way you have it is fine but you could create a set of extension methods to make "a more elegant way to check for the 'NOT' instance."

public static bool Is<T>(this object myObject)
{
    return (myObject is T);
}

public static bool IsNot<T>(this object myObject)
{
    return !(myObject is T);
}

Then you could write:

if (child.IsNot<IContainer>())
{
    // child is not an IContainer
}
5
votes

Ugly? I disagree. The only other way (I personally think this is "uglier"):

var obj = child as IContainer;
if(obj == null)
{
   //child "aint" IContainer
}
3
votes

The is operator evaluates to a boolean result, so you can do anything you would otherwise be able to do on a bool. To negate it use the ! operator. Why would you want to have a different operator just for this?

3
votes

The extension method IsNot<T> is a nice way to extend the syntax. Keep in mind

var container = child as IContainer;
if(container != null)
{
  // do something w/ contianer
}

performs better than doing something like

if(child is IContainer)
{
  var container = child as IContainer;
  // do something w/ container
}

In your case, it doesn't matter as you are returning from the method. In other words, be careful to not do both the check for type and then the type conversion immediately after.

3
votes

While this doesn't avoid the problem of parentheses, for the sake of people getting here via Google, it should be mentioned that newer syntax exists (as of C# 7) to make the rest of your code a little cleaner:

if (!(DocumentPart is IContainer container)) { return; }
foreach(DocumentPart child in container.Children) {
    ...

This avoids the double-cast, the null-check, and having a variable available in scopes where it could be null.

2
votes

While the IS operator is normally the best way, there is an alternative that you can use in some cirumstances. You can use the as operator and test for null.

MyClass mc = foo as MyClass;
if ( mc == null ) { }
else {}
-1
votes

Ill use this

If(!(object is Car)){

}

-3
votes
if (child is IContainer ? false : true)