Return to Answer

I would prefer the first one for a few reasons.

1. It's more readable and easily understandable in my opinion.
2. There's only one string, so less overhead. (Which is negligible unless this is being called a lot.)
3. There's only one array. Reverse creates a second array.

That being said, an actual review is in order.

• Methods that return a boolean value should have names of the form IsSomething or HasSomething. A great name would be IsPalindrome.
• Neither method accepts anything but a string. Numbers can be palindromic too. Wouldn't it be a nice addition if we could pass an integer to it as well? (Without explicitly calling .ToString() before passing it in that is.)
• I like that you're only checking for i < j instead of i <= j. It saves a useless iteration when there are an odd number of characters.
• I also like the while loop. It's a lot cleaner than the for loop suggested by another answer.
• I won't speak much on the second method, because I think @elios provided a nice implementation of it.

I would prefer the first one for a few reasons.

1. It's more readable and easily understandable in my opinion.
2. There's only one string, so less overhead. (Which is negligible unless this is being called a lot.)
3. There's only one array. Reverse creates a second array.

That being said, an actual review is in order.

• Methods that return a boolean value should have names of the form IsSomething or HasSomething. A great name would be IsPalindrome.
• Neither method accepts anything but a string. Numbers can be palindromic too. Wouldn't it be a nice addition if we could pass an integer to it as well? (Without explicitly calling .ToString() before passing it in that is.)
• I like that you're only checking for i < j instead of i <= j. It saves a useless iteration when there are an odd number of characters.
• I also like the while loop. It's a lot cleaner than the for loop suggested by another answer.
• I won't speak much on the second method, because I think @elios provided a nice implementation of it.

I would prefer the first one for a few reasons.

1. It's more readable and easily understandable in my opinion.
2. There's only one string, so less overheard. (Which is negligible unless this is being called a lot.)
3. There's only one array. Reverse creates a second array.

That being said, an actual review is in order.

• Methods that return a boolean value should have names of the form IsSomething or HasSomething. A great name would be IsPalindrome.
• Neither method accepts anything but a string. Numbers can be palindromic too. Wouldn't it be a nice addition if we could pass an integer to it as well? (Without explicitly calling .ToString() before passing it in that is.)
• I like that you're only checking for i < j instead of i <= j. It saves a useless iteration when there are an odd number of characters.
• I also like the while loop. It's a lot cleaner than the for loop suggested by another answer.
• I won't speak much on the second method, because I think @elios provided a nice implementation of it.

I would prefer the first one for a few reasons.

1. It's more readable and easily understandable in my opinion.
2. There's only one string, so less overhead. (Which is negligible unless this is being called a lot.)
3. There's only one array. Reverse creates a second array.

That being said, an actual review is in order.

• Methods that return a boolean value should have names of the form IsSomething or HasSomething. A great name would be IsPalindrome.
• Neither method accepts anything but a string. Numbers can be palindromic too. Wouldn't it be a nice addition if we could pass an integer to it as well? (Without explicitly calling .ToString() before passing it in that is.)
• I like that you're only checking for i < j instead of i <= j. It saves a useless iteration when there are an odd number of characters.
• I also like the while loop. It's a lot cleaner than the for loop suggested by another answer.
• I won't speak much on the second method, because I think @elios provided a nice implementation of it.

I would prefer the first one for a few reasons.

1. It's more readable and easily understandable in my opinion.
2. There's only one string, so less overheard. (Which is negligible unless this is being called a lot.)
3. There's only one array. Reverse creates a second array.

That being said, an actual review is in order.

• Methods that return a boolean value should have names of the form IsSomething or HasSomething. A great name would be IsPalindrome.
• Neither method accepts anything but a string. Numbers can be palindromic too. wouldn't it be nice if we could pass an integer to it as well? (Without explicitly calling .ToString() before passing it in that is.)
• I like that you're only checking for i<j instead of i <= j. It saves a useless iteration when there are an odd number of characters.
• I also like the while loop. It's a lot cleaner than the for loop suggested by another answer.
• I won't speak much on the second method, because I think @elios provided a nice implementation of it.

I would prefer the first one for a few reasons.

1. It's more readable and easily understandable in my opinion.
2. There's only one string, so less overheard. (Which is negligible unless this is being called a lot.)
3. There's only one array. Reverse creates a second array.

That being said, an actual review is in order.

• Methods that return a boolean value should have names of the form IsSomething or HasSomething. A great name would be IsPalindrome.
• Neither method accepts anything but a string. Numbers can be palindromic too. Wouldn't it be a nice addition if we could pass an integer to it as well? (Without explicitly calling .ToString() before passing it in that is.)
• I like that you're only checking for i < j instead of i <= j. It saves a useless iteration when there are an odd number of characters.
• I also like the while loop. It's a lot cleaner than the for loop suggested by another answer.
• I won't speak much on the second method, because I think @elios provided a nice implementation of it.