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。

List<T> TheList = new List<T>();

TheList.FindAll(element => element.Satisfies(Condition)).ForEach(element => TheList.Remove(element));

使用for循环反向迭代列表:

for (int i = safePendingList.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
    // some code
    // safePendingList.RemoveAt(i);
}

例子:

var list = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 10));
for (int i = list.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
    if (list[i] > 5)
        list.RemoveAt(i);
}
list.ForEach(i => Console.WriteLine(i));

或者，你可以使用RemoveAll方法和一个谓词来测试:

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

下面是一个简单的例子:

var list = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 10));
Console.WriteLine("Before:");
list.ForEach(i => Console.WriteLine(i));
list.RemoveAll(i => i > 5);
Console.WriteLine("After:");
list.ForEach(i => Console.WriteLine(i));

复制您正在迭代的列表。然后从副本中删除并与原件相互作用。倒退是令人困惑的，并且在并行循环时不能很好地工作。

var ids = new List<int> { 1, 2, 3, 4 };
var iterableIds = ids.ToList();

Parallel.ForEach(iterableIds, id =>
{
    ids.Remove(id);
});

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.

For循环是一个不好的构造。

使用时

var numbers = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 3));

while (numbers.Count > 0)
{
    numbers.RemoveAt(0);
}

但是，如果你一定要用for

var numbers = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 3));

for (; numbers.Count > 0;)
{
    numbers.RemoveAt(0);
}

或者,这个:

public static class Extensions
{

    public static IList<T> Remove<T>(
        this IList<T> numbers,
        Func<T, bool> predicate)
    {
        numbers.ForEachBackwards(predicate, (n, index) => numbers.RemoveAt(index));
        return numbers;
    }

    public static void ForEachBackwards<T>(
        this IList<T> numbers,
        Func<T, bool> predicate,
        Action<T, int> action)
    {
        for (var i = numbers.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--)
        {
            if (predicate(numbers[i]))
            {
                action(numbers[i], i);
            }
        }
    }
}

用法:

var numbers = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 10)).Remove((n) => n > 5);

然而，LINQ已经有RemoveAll()来做这件事

var numbers = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 10));
numbers.RemoveAll((n) => n > 5);

最后，你最好使用LINQ的Where()来过滤和创建一个新列表，而不是改变现有的列表。不变性通常是好的。

var numbers = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 10))
    .Where((n) => n <= 5)
    .ToList();