当您需要值类型语义而不是引用类型时，请使用结构。结构体是按值复制的，所以要小心!

另见以前的问题，例如:

.NET中struct和class的区别是什么?

当您不需要行为，但需要比简单的数组或字典更多的结构时。

跟进 这就是我对结构体的一般看法。我知道他们可以有方法，但我喜欢保持整体的精神区分。

正如@Simon所说，结构体提供了“值类型”语义，所以如果你需要类似于内置数据类型的行为，可以使用结构体。由于结构体是通过复制传递的，所以要确保它们的大小很小，大约16字节。

我会在以下情况下使用结构体:

an object is supposed to be read only(every time you pass/assign a struct it gets copied). Read only objects are great when it comes to multithreaded processing as they don't requite locking in most cases. an object is small and short-living. In such a case there is a good chance that the object will be allocated on the stack which is much more efficient than putting it on the managed heap. What is more the memory allocated by the object will be freed as soon as it goes outside its scope. In other words it's less work for Garbage Collector and the memory is used more efficient.

MSDN给出了答案: 在类和结构之间选择。

基本上，这个页面给你一个4项清单，并告诉你使用一个类，除非你的类型满足所有的标准。

不定义结构，除非 类型包含以下所有内容 特点: 它在逻辑上表示一个值，类似于基本类型 (整数，双精度，等等)。 实例大小小于16字节。 它是不可变的。 它不需要经常装箱。

当我想要将几个值组合在一起以从方法调用中传递内容时，我总是使用结构体，但在读取这些值之后，我将不需要将它用于任何事情。只是为了保持干净。我倾向于将struct中的东西视为“扔掉的”，而将类中的东西视为更有用和“功能性的”

嗯…

I wouldn't use garbage collection as an argument for/against the use of structs vs classes. The managed heap works much like a stack - creating an object just puts it at the top of the heap, which is almost as fast as allocating on the stack. Additionally, if an object is short-lived and does not survive a GC cycle, deallocation is free as the GC only works with memory that's still accessible. (Search MSDN, there's a series of articles on .NET memory management, I'm just too lazy to go dig for them).

大多数情况下，我使用结构体时，都会后悔这样做，因为我后来发现使用引用语义会让事情更简单一些。

无论如何，上面的MSDN文章中的这四点似乎是一个很好的指导方针。

我很惊讶我没有读到之前的答案，我认为这是最关键的方面:

当我想要一个没有标识的类型时，我使用结构体。例如一个3D点:

public struct ThreeDimensionalPoint
{
    public readonly int X, Y, Z;
    public ThreeDimensionalPoint(int x, int y, int z)
    {
        this.X = x;
        this.Y = y;
        this.Z = z;
    }

    public override string ToString()
    {
        return "(X=" + this.X + ", Y=" + this.Y + ", Z=" + this.Z + ")";
    }

    public override int GetHashCode()
    {
        return (this.X + 2) ^ (this.Y + 2) ^ (this.Z + 2);
    }

    public override bool Equals(object obj)
    {
        if (!(obj is ThreeDimensionalPoint))
            return false;
        ThreeDimensionalPoint other = (ThreeDimensionalPoint)obj;
        return this == other;
    }

    public static bool operator ==(ThreeDimensionalPoint p1, ThreeDimensionalPoint p2)
    {
        return p1.X == p2.X && p1.Y == p2.Y && p1.Z == p2.Z;
    }

    public static bool operator !=(ThreeDimensionalPoint p1, ThreeDimensionalPoint p2)
    {
        return !(p1 == p2);
    }
}

如果你有这个结构体的两个实例，你不关心它们是内存中的单个数据还是两个。你只关心他们持有的价值。

Bill Wagner在他的书《effective c#》(http://www.amazon.com/Effective-Specific-Ways-Improve-Your/dp/0321245660)中有一章是关于这个的。他总结了以下原则:

类型数据存储的主要职责是什么? 它的公共接口是否完全由访问或修改其数据成员的属性定义? 你确定你的类型永远不会有子类吗? 您确定您的类型永远不会被多态处理吗? 如果你对4个问题都回答“是”，请使用结构体。否则，使用 类。

If an entity is going to be immutable, the question of whether to use a struct or a class will generally be one of performance rather than semantics. On a 32/64-bit system, class references require 4/8 bytes to store, regardless of the amount of information in the class; copying a class reference will require copying 4/8 bytes. On the other hand, every distinct class instance will have 8/16 bytes of overhead in addition to the information it holds and the memory cost of the references to it. Suppose one wants an array of 500 entities, each holding four 32-bit integers. If the entity is a structure type, the array will require 8,000 bytes regardless of whether all 500 entities are all identical, all different, or somewhere between. If the entity is a class type, the array of 500 references will take 4,000 bytes. If those references all point to different objects, the objects would require an additional 24 bytes each (12,000 bytes for all 500), a total of 16,000 bytes--twice the storage cost of a struct type. On the other hand, of the code created one object instance and then copied a reference to all 500 array slots, the total cost would be 24 bytes for that instance and 4,000 for the array--a total of 4,024 bytes. A major savings. Few situations would work out as well as the last one, but in some cases it may be possible to copy some references to enough array slots to make such sharing worthwhile.

如果实体应该是可变的，那么使用类还是结构的问题在某些方面会更容易。假设“Thing”是一个具有整数字段x的结构体或类，并执行以下代码:

  Thing t1,t2;
  ...
  t2 = t1;
  t2.x = 5;

是否希望后一种说法影响t1.x?

如果Thing是类类型，t1和t2将等效，即t1。X和t2。X也是等价的。因此，第二个语句将影响t1.x。如果Thing是一个结构类型，t1和t2将是不同的实例，即t1。X和t2。X表示不同的整数。因此，第二个语句不会影响t1.x。

Mutable structures and mutable classes have fundamentally different behaviors, though .net has some quirks in its handling of struct mutations. If one wants value-type behavior (meaning that "t2=t1" will copy the data from t1 to t2 while leaving t1 and t2 as distinct instances), and if one can live with the quirks in .net's handling of value types, use a structure. If one wants value-type semantics but .net's quirks would cause lead to broken value-type semantics in one's application, use a class and mumble.

除了以上精彩的回答:

结构是值类型。

它们永远不能被设置为“无”。

设置一个结构= Nothing，将其所有的值类型设置为默认值。

结构体在堆栈上而不是堆上因此它们是线程安全的，应该在实现传输对象模式时使用，你永远不想在堆上使用对象它们是易变的，在这种情况下你想使用调用堆栈，这是使用结构体的基本情况我对这里的答案感到惊讶，

在以下情况下使用类:

它的身份很重要。结构在按值传递给方法时被隐式复制。 它将占用大量内存。 它的字段需要初始化式。 你需要从基类继承。 你需要多态行为;

在以下情况下使用结构:

It will act like a primitive type (int, long, byte, etc.). It must have a small memory footprint. You are calling a P/Invoke method that requires a structure to be passed in by value. You need to reduce the impact of garbage collection on application performance. Its fields need to be initialized only to their default values. This value would be zero for numeric types, false for Boolean types, and null for reference types. Note that in C# 6.0 structs can have a default constructor that can be used to initialize the struct’s fields to nondefault values. You do not need to inherit from a base class (other than ValueType, from which all structs inherit). You do not need polymorphic behavior.

我认为最好的答案就是当你需要的是属性的集合时使用struct，当你需要的是属性和行为的集合时使用class。

这是一个老话题，但希望提供一个简单的基准测试。

我已经创建了两个。cs文件:

public class TestClass
{
    public long ID { get; set; }
    public string FirstName { get; set; }
    public string LastName { get; set; }
}

and

public struct TestStruct
{
    public long ID { get; set; }
    public string FirstName { get; set; }
    public string LastName { get; set; }
}

运行基准:

创建一个TestClass 创建一个TestStruct 创建100个TestClass 创建100个TestStruct 创建10000个TestClass 创建10000 TestStruct

结果:

BenchmarkDotNet=v0.12.0, OS=Windows 10.0.18362
Intel Core i5-8250U CPU 1.60GHz (Kaby Lake R), 1 CPU, 8 logical and 4 physical cores
.NET Core SDK=3.1.101
[Host]     : .NET Core 3.1.1 (CoreCLR 4.700.19.60701, CoreFX 4.700.19.60801), X64 RyuJIT  [AttachedDebugger]
DefaultJob : .NET Core 3.1.1 (CoreCLR 4.700.19.60701, CoreFX 4.700.19.60801), X64 RyuJIT


|         Method |           Mean |         Error |        StdDev |     Ratio | RatioSD | Rank |    Gen 0 | Gen 1 | Gen 2 | Allocated |
|--------------- |---------------:|--------------:|--------------:|----------:|--------:|-----:|---------:|------:|------:|----------:|

|      UseStruct |      0.0000 ns |     0.0000 ns |     0.0000 ns |     0.000 |    0.00 |    1 |        - |     - |     - |         - |
|       UseClass |      8.1425 ns |     0.1873 ns |     0.1839 ns |     1.000 |    0.00 |    2 |   0.0127 |     - |     - |      40 B |
|   Use100Struct |     36.9359 ns |     0.4026 ns |     0.3569 ns |     4.548 |    0.12 |    3 |        - |     - |     - |         - |
|    Use100Class |    759.3495 ns |    14.8029 ns |    17.0471 ns |    93.144 |    3.24 |    4 |   1.2751 |     - |     - |    4000 B |
| Use10000Struct |  3,002.1976 ns |    25.4853 ns |    22.5920 ns |   369.664 |    8.91 |    5 |        - |     - |     - |         - |
|  Use10000Class | 76,529.2751 ns | 1,570.9425 ns | 2,667.5795 ns | 9,440.182 |  346.76 |    6 | 127.4414 |     - |     - |  400000 B |

✔️如果该类型的实例很小且通常存在时间很短，或者通常嵌入在其他对象中，请考虑定义一个结构而不是类。