I use javascript:void(0)
.
Three reasons. Encouraging the use of #
amongst a team of developers inevitably leads to some using the return value of the function called like this:
function doSomething() {
//Some code
return false;
}
But then they forget to use return doSomething()
in the onclick and just use doSomething()
.
A second reason for avoiding #
is that the final return false;
will not execute if the called function throws an error. Hence the developers have to also remember to handle any error appropriately in the called function.
A third reason is that there are cases where the onclick
event property is assigned dynamically. I prefer to be able to call a function or assign it dynamically without having to code the function specifically for one method of attachment or another. Hence my onclick
(or on anything) in HTML markup look like this:
onclick="someFunc.call(this)"
OR
onclick="someFunc.apply(this, arguments)"
Using javascript:void(0)
avoids all of the above headaches, and I haven't found any examples of a downside.
So if you're a lone developer then you can clearly make your own choice, but if you work as a team you have to either state:
Use href="#"
, make sure onclick
always contains return false;
at the end, that any called function does not throw an error and if you attach a function dynamically to the onclick
property make sure that as well as not throwing an error it returns false
.
OR
Use href="javascript:void(0)"
The second is clearly much easier to communicate.
C# language version history:
These are the versions of C# known about at the time of this writing:
- C# 1.0 released with .NET 1.0 and VS2002 (January 2002)
- C# 1.2 (bizarrely enough); released with .NET 1.1 and VS2003 (April 2003). First version to call
Dispose
on IEnumerator
s which implemented IDisposable
. A few other small features.
- C# 2.0 released with .NET 2.0 and VS2005 (November 2005). Major new features: generics, anonymous methods, nullable types, and iterator blocks
- C# 3.0 released with .NET 3.5 and VS2008 (November 2007). Major new features: lambda expressions, extension methods, expression trees, anonymous types, implicit typing (
var
), and query expressions
- C# 4.0 released with .NET 4 and VS2010 (April 2010). Major new features: late binding (
dynamic
), delegate and interface generic variance, more COM support, named arguments, tuple data type and optional parameters
- C# 5.0 released with .NET 4.5 and VS2012 (August 2012). Major features: async programming, and caller info attributes. Breaking change: loop variable closure.
- C# 6.0 released with .NET 4.6 and VS2015 (July 2015). Implemented by Roslyn. Features: initializers for automatically implemented properties, using directives to import static members, exception filters, element initializers,
await
in catch
and finally
, extension Add
methods in collection initializers.
- C# 7.0 released with .NET 4.7 and VS2017 (March 2017). Major new features: tuples, ref locals and ref return, pattern matching (including pattern-based switch statements), inline
out
parameter declarations, local functions, binary literals, digit separators, and arbitrary async returns.
- C# 7.1 released with VS2017 v15.3 (August 2017). New features: async main, tuple member name inference, default expression, and pattern matching with generics.
- C# 7.2 released with VS2017 v15.5 (November 2017). New features: private protected access modifier, Span<T>, aka interior pointer, aka stackonly struct, and everything else.
- C# 7.3 released with VS2017 v15.7 (May 2018). New features: enum, delegate and
unmanaged
generic type constraints. ref
reassignment. Unsafe improvements: stackalloc
initialization, unpinned indexed fixed
buffers, custom fixed
statements. Improved overloading resolution. Expression variables in initializers and queries. ==
and !=
defined for tuples. Auto-properties' backing fields can now be targeted by attributes.
- C# 8.0 released with .NET Core 3.0 and VS2019 v16.3 (September 2019). Major new features: nullable reference-types, asynchronous streams, indices and ranges, readonly members, using declarations, default interface methods, static local functions, and enhancement of interpolated verbatim strings.
- C# 9.0 released with .NET 5.0 and VS2019 v16.8 (November 2020). Major new features: init-only properties, records, with-expressions, data classes, positional records, top-level programs, improved pattern matching (simple type patterns, relational patterns, logical patterns), improved target typing (target-type
new
expressions, target typed ??
and ?
), and covariant returns. Minor features: relax ordering of ref
and partial
modifiers, parameter null checking, lambda discard parameters, native int
s, attributes on local functions, function pointers, static lambdas, extension GetEnumerator
, module initializers, and extending partial.
In response to the OP's question:
What are the correct version numbers for C#? What came out when? Why can't I find any answers about C# 3.5?
There is no such thing as C# 3.5 - the cause of confusion here is that the C# 3.0 is present in .NET 3.5. The language and framework are versioned independently, however - as is the CLR, which is at version 2.0 for .NET 2.0 through 3.5, .NET 4 introducing CLR 4.0, service packs notwithstanding. The CLR in .NET 4.5 has various improvements, but the versioning is unclear: in some places it may be referred to as CLR 4.5 (this MSDN page used to refer to it that way, for example), but the Environment.Version
property still reports 4.0.xxx.
As of May 3, 2017, the C# Language Team created a history of C# versions and features on their GitHub repository: Features Added in C# Language Versions. There is also a page that tracks upcoming and recently implemented language features.
Best Solution
Short answer: it depends.
Long answer: if you already have an array of strings to concatenate together (with a delimiter),
String.Join
is the fastest way of doing it.String.Join
can look through all of the strings to work out the exact length it needs, then go again and copy all the data. This means there will be no extra copying involved. The only downside is that it has to go through the strings twice, which means potentially blowing the memory cache more times than necessary.If you don't have the strings as an array beforehand, it's probably faster to use
StringBuilder
- but there will be situations where it isn't. If using aStringBuilder
means doing lots and lots of copies, then building an array and then callingString.Join
may well be faster.EDIT: This is in terms of a single call to
String.Join
vs a bunch of calls toStringBuilder.Append
. In the original question, we had two different levels ofString.Join
calls, so each of the nested calls would have created an intermediate string. In other words, it's even more complex and harder to guess about. I would be surprised to see either way "win" significantly (in complexity terms) with typical data.EDIT: When I'm at home, I'll write up a benchmark which is as painful as possibly for
StringBuilder
. Basically if you have an array where each element is about twice the size of the previous one, and you get it just right, you should be able to force a copy for every append (of elements, not of the delimiter, although that needs to be taken into account too). At that point it's nearly as bad as simple string concatenation - butString.Join
will have no problems.