public static string OrdinalSuffix(int ordinal)
{
    //Because negatives won't work with modular division as expected:
    var abs = Math.Abs(ordinal); 

    var lastdigit = abs % 10; 

    return 
        //Catch 60% of cases (to infinity) in the first conditional:
        lastdigit > 3 || lastdigit == 0 || (abs % 100) - lastdigit == 10 ? "th" 
            : lastdigit == 1 ? "st" 
            : lastdigit == 2 ? "nd" 
            : "rd";
}

我使用这个扩展类:

public static class Int32Extensions
{
    public static string ToOrdinal(this int i)
    {
        return (i + "th")
            .Replace("1th", "1st")
            .Replace("2th", "2nd")
            .Replace("3th", "3rd");
    }
}

另一个一行程序，但是没有进行比较，只将正则表达式结果索引到数组中。

public static string GetOrdinalSuffix(int input)
{
    return new []{"th", "st", "nd", "rd"}[Convert.ToInt32("0" + Regex.Match(input.ToString(), "(?<!1)[1-3]$").Value)];
}

PowerShell版本可以进一步缩短:

function ord($num) { return ('th','st','nd','rd')[[int]($num -match '(?<!1)[1-3]$') * $matches[0]] }

我很喜欢Stu和samjudson解决方案中的元素，并将它们结合在一起，形成了我认为可用的组合:

public static string Ordinal(this int number)
{
    const string TH = "th";
    var s = number.ToString();
    
    number %= 100;
    
    if ((number >= 11) && (number <= 13))
    {
        return s + TH;
    }
   
    switch (number % 10)
    {
        case 1:
            return s + "st";
        case 2:
            return s + "nd";
        case 3:
            return s + "rd";
        default:
            return s + TH;
    }
}

杰西版本的斯图和萨姆贾德森版本的我的版本:)

包含单元测试，以显示接受的答案是不正确的，当数字< 1

/// <summary>
/// Get the ordinal value of positive integers.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// Only works for english-based cultures.
/// Code from: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20156/is-there-a-quick-way-to-create-ordinals-in-c/31066#31066
/// With help: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-ordinal-number.htm
/// </remarks>
/// <param name="number">The number.</param>
/// <returns>Ordinal value of positive integers, or <see cref="int.ToString"/> if less than 1.</returns>
public static string Ordinal(this int number)
{
    const string TH = "th";
    string s = number.ToString();

    // Negative and zero have no ordinal representation
    if (number < 1)
    {
        return s;
    }

    number %= 100;
    if ((number >= 11) && (number <= 13))
    {
        return s + TH;
    }

    switch (number % 10)
    {
        case 1: return s + "st";
        case 2: return s + "nd";
        case 3: return s + "rd";
        default: return s + TH;
    }
}

[Test]
public void Ordinal_ReturnsExpectedResults()
{
    Assert.AreEqual("-1", (1-2).Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("0", 0.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("1st", 1.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("2nd", 2.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("3rd", 3.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("4th", 4.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("5th", 5.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("6th", 6.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("7th", 7.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("8th", 8.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("9th", 9.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("10th", 10.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("11th", 11.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("12th", 12.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("13th", 13.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("14th", 14.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("20th", 20.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("21st", 21.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("22nd", 22.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("23rd", 23.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("24th", 24.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("100th", 100.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("101st", 101.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("102nd", 102.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("103rd", 103.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("104th", 104.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("110th", 110.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("111th", 111.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("112th", 112.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("113th", 113.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("114th", 114.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("120th", 120.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("121st", 121.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("122nd", 122.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("123rd", 123.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("124th", 124.Ordinal());
}

虽然我还没有对此进行基准测试，但通过避免所有条件case语句，您应该能够获得更好的性能。

这是java，但是移植到c#很简单:

public class NumberUtil {
  final static String[] ORDINAL_SUFFIXES = {
    "th", "st", "nd", "rd", "th", "th", "th", "th", "th", "th"
  };

  public static String ordinalSuffix(int value) {
    int n = Math.abs(value);
    int lastTwoDigits = n % 100;
    int lastDigit = n % 10;
    int index = (lastTwoDigits >= 11 && lastTwoDigits <= 13) ? 0 : lastDigit;
    return ORDINAL_SUFFIXES[index];
  }

  public static String toOrdinal(int n) {
    return new StringBuffer().append(n).append(ordinalSuffix(n)).toString();
  }
}

注意，如果在一个紧密循环中生成大量序数，减少条件和使用数组查找应该会提高性能。然而，我也承认这并不像case语句解决方案那样可读。