Found this gem and just wanted to leave it here :-|

My god

It's dead code, right? ... Right?

...And I had insecurities about my code quality. Thank you.

It is a 50/50 chance

>0 references

Thank god

@LotsOfCaffeine it's used in xaml. and therefore it shows no references :S

this is production code and in use. Already fixed it though. I couldn't leave it like that.

Just changing the signature to return bool would be a huge improvement; then at least people would be like "wtf is this" without even having to look at it.

@spongessuck some might question why we need a class to invert a boolean in the first place

oooooh fuuuck... quite sophisticated code...

Is not is as bool? Yes.

(Object)null is true.
That triggers me

@ElectroArchiver Damn. Im crying🤣🤣

I wonder why are all those checking needed? C# is a very strongly typed language, and all of the time, we know very well what is a method's return value.

Why even need to check if the value's type is a "bool" or "bool?"

Also C# has Convert.ToBoolean if somehow, the value's type is really unknown.

That’s very amusing to me, I think the person that wrote this must have banged their head against they keyboard in agony because otherwise why would you add these checks 😂

That's productivity. The guy writes already obfuscated code.