你不能使用foreach，但是当你删除一个项目时，你可以向前迭代并管理你的循环索引变量，如下所示:

for (int i = 0; i < elements.Count; i++)
{
    if (<condition>)
    {
        // Decrement the loop counter to iterate this index again, since later elements will get moved down during the remove operation.
        elements.RemoveAt(i--);
    }
}

注意，一般来说，所有这些技术都依赖于被迭代的集合的行为。这里显示的技术将与标准List(T)一起工作。(很有可能编写自己的集合类和迭代器，允许在foreach循环期间删除项。)

foreach(var item in list.ToList())

{

if(item.Delete) list.Remove(item);

}

只需从第一个列表创建一个全新的列表。我说“简单”而不是“正确”，因为创建一个全新的列表可能比之前的方法具有更高的性能(我没有费心进行任何基准测试)。我通常更喜欢这种模式，它在克服Linq-To-Entities限制方面也很有用。

for(i = list.Count()-1;i>=0;i--)

{

item=list[i];

if (item.Delete) list.Remove(item);

}

这种方法使用普通的For循环向后遍历列表。如果集合的大小发生了变化，那么向前执行这个操作可能会有问题，但是向后执行应该总是安全的。

从列表中删除一个项的成本与后面要删除的项的数量成正比。在前半部分的条目符合删除条件的情况下，任何基于单独删除条目的方法最终都将不得不执行大约N*N/4个条目复制操作，如果列表很大，这可能会非常昂贵。

A faster approach is to scan through the list to find the first item to be removed (if any), and then from that point forward copy each item which should be retained to the spot where it belongs. Once this is done, if R items should be retained, the first R items in the list will be those R items, and all of the items requiring deletion will be at the end. If those items are deleted in reverse order, the system won't end up having to copy any of them, so if the list had N items of which R items, including all of the first F, were retained, it will be necessary to copy R-F items, and shrink the list by one item N-R times. All linear time.

因为任何移除都是在你可以使用的条件下进行的

list.RemoveAll(item => item.Value == someValue);

Using Remove or RemoveAt on a list while iterating over that list has intentionally been made difficult, because it is almost always the wrong thing to do. You might be able to get it working with some clever trick, but it would be extremely slow. Every time you call Remove it has to scan through the entire list to find the element you want to remove. Every time you call RemoveAt it has to move subsequent elements 1 position to the left. As such, any solution using Remove or RemoveAt, would require quadratic time, O(n²).

如果可以，使用RemoveAll。否则，下面的模式将在线性时间O(n)内就地过滤列表。

// Create a list to be filtered
IList<int> elements = new List<int>(new int[] {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10});
// Filter the list
int kept = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < elements.Count; i++) {
    // Test whether this is an element that we want to keep.
    if (elements[i] % 3 > 0) {
        // Add it to the list of kept elements.
        elements[kept] = elements[i];
        kept++;
    }
}
// Unfortunately IList has no Resize method. So instead we
// remove the last element of the list until: elements.Count == kept.
while (kept < elements.Count) elements.RemoveAt(elements.Count-1);

我将从一个过滤掉您不想保留的元素的LINQ查询中重新分配列表。

list = list.Where(item => ...).ToList();

除非列表非常大，否则这样做应该不会有明显的性能问题。