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);

我会这样做

using System.IO;
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;

class Author
    {
        public string Firstname;
        public string Lastname;
        public int no;
    }

class Program
{
    private static bool isEven(int i) 
    { 
        return ((i % 2) == 0); 
    } 

    static void Main()
    {    
        var authorsList = new List<Author>()
        {
            new Author{ Firstname = "Bob", Lastname = "Smith", no = 2 },
            new Author{ Firstname = "Fred", Lastname = "Jones", no = 3 },
            new Author{ Firstname = "Brian", Lastname = "Brains", no = 4 },
            new Author{ Firstname = "Billy", Lastname = "TheKid", no = 1 }
        };

        authorsList.RemoveAll(item => isEven(item.no));

        foreach(var auth in authorsList)
        {
            Console.WriteLine(auth.Firstname + " " + auth.Lastname);
        }
    }
}

输出

Fred Jones
Billy TheKid

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);

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);
});

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。

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();