我创建了一个扩展来响应这个，你可以把它包括在你的项目中，我认为这返回的大多数情况下，当你在列表或Linq中搜索重复。

例子:

//Dummy class to compare in list
public class Person
{
    public int Id { get; set; }
    public string Name { get; set; }
    public string Surname { get; set; }
    public Person(int id, string name, string surname)
    {
        this.Id = id;
        this.Name = name;
        this.Surname = surname;
    }
}


//The extention static class
public static class Extention
{
    public static IEnumerable<T> getMoreThanOnceRepeated<T>(this IEnumerable<T> extList, Func<T, object> groupProps) where T : class
    { //Return only the second and next reptition
        return extList
            .GroupBy(groupProps)
            .SelectMany(z => z.Skip(1)); //Skip the first occur and return all the others that repeats
    }
    public static IEnumerable<T> getAllRepeated<T>(this IEnumerable<T> extList, Func<T, object> groupProps) where T : class
    {
        //Get All the lines that has repeating
        return extList
            .GroupBy(groupProps)
            .Where(z => z.Count() > 1) //Filter only the distinct one
            .SelectMany(z => z);//All in where has to be retuned
    }
}

//how to use it:
void DuplicateExample()
{
    //Populate List
    List<Person> PersonsLst = new List<Person>(){
    new Person(1,"Ricardo","Figueiredo"), //fist Duplicate to the example
    new Person(2,"Ana","Figueiredo"),
    new Person(3,"Ricardo","Figueiredo"),//second Duplicate to the example
    new Person(4,"Margarida","Figueiredo"),
    new Person(5,"Ricardo","Figueiredo")//third Duplicate to the example
    };

    Console.WriteLine("All:");
    PersonsLst.ForEach(z => Console.WriteLine("{0} -> {1} {2}", z.Id, z.Name, z.Surname));
    /* OUTPUT:
        All:
        1 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        2 -> Ana Figueiredo
        3 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        4 -> Margarida Figueiredo
        5 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        */

    Console.WriteLine("All lines with repeated data");
    PersonsLst.getAllRepeated(z => new { z.Name, z.Surname })
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(z => Console.WriteLine("{0} -> {1} {2}", z.Id, z.Name, z.Surname));
    /* OUTPUT:
        All lines with repeated data
        1 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        3 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        5 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        */
    Console.WriteLine("Only Repeated more than once");
    PersonsLst.getMoreThanOnceRepeated(z => new { z.Name, z.Surname })
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(z => Console.WriteLine("{0} -> {1} {2}", z.Id, z.Name, z.Surname));
    /* OUTPUT:
        Only Repeated more than once
        3 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        5 -> Ricardo Figueiredo
        */
}

有一个答案，但我不明白为什么不工作;

var anyDuplicate = enumerable.GroupBy(x => x.Key).Any(g => g.Count() > 1);

我的解是这样的;

var duplicates = model.list
                    .GroupBy(s => s.SAME_ID)
                    .Where(g => g.Count() > 1).Count() > 0;
if(duplicates) {
    doSomething();
}

这是另一种方法:

对于HasDuplicate:

bool hasAnyDuplicate = list.Count > list.Distinct().Count;

对于重复值

List<string> duplicates = new List<string>();
duplicates.AddRange(list);
list.Distinct().ToList().ForEach(x => duplicates.Remove(x));

// for unique duplicate values:
duplicates.Distinct():

另一种方法是使用HashSet:

var hash = new HashSet<int>();
var duplicates = list.Where(i => !hash.Add(i));

如果你想在你的重复列表中的唯一值:

var myhash = new HashSet<int>();
var mylist = new List<int>(){1,1,2,2,3,3,3,4,4,4};
var duplicates = mylist.Where(item => !myhash.Add(item)).Distinct().ToList();

下面是与通用扩展方法相同的解决方案:

public static class Extensions
{
  public static IEnumerable<TSource> GetDuplicates<TSource, TKey>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TSource, TKey> selector, IEqualityComparer<TKey> comparer)
  {
    var hash = new HashSet<TKey>(comparer);
    return source.Where(item => !hash.Add(selector(item))).ToList();
  }

  public static IEnumerable<TSource> GetDuplicates<TSource>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, IEqualityComparer<TSource> comparer)
  {
    return source.GetDuplicates(x => x, comparer);      
  }

  public static IEnumerable<TSource> GetDuplicates<TSource, TKey>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TSource, TKey> selector)
  {
    return source.GetDuplicates(selector, null);
  }

  public static IEnumerable<TSource> GetDuplicates<TSource>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source)
  {
    return source.GetDuplicates(x => x, null);
  }
}

所有的GroupBy答案都是最简单的，但不是最有效的。它们对内存性能尤其不利，因为构建大型内部集合需要分配成本。

一个不错的替代方案是HuBeZa的HashSet。基于添加的方法。它表现得更好。

如果你不关心空值，就我所知，像这样的东西是最有效的(CPU和内存):

public static IEnumerable<TProperty> Duplicates<TSource, TProperty>(
    this IEnumerable<TSource> source,
    Func<TSource, TProperty> duplicateSelector,
    IEqualityComparer<TProperty> comparer = null)
{
    comparer ??= EqualityComparer<TProperty>.Default;

    Dictionary<TProperty, int> counts = new Dictionary<TProperty, int>(comparer);

    foreach (var item in source)
    {
        TProperty property = duplicateSelector(item);
        counts.TryGetValue(property, out int count);

        switch (count)
        {
            case 0:
                counts[property] = ++count;
                break;

            case 1:
                counts[property] = ++count;
                yield return property;
                break;
        }
    }
}

这里的技巧是在重复数达到1时避免额外的查找成本。当然，如果您还想知道每个项重复出现的次数，则可以使用count不断更新字典。对于null，你只需要一些额外的处理，仅此而已。

你可以这样做:

var list = new[] {1,2,3,1,4,2};
var duplicateItems = list.Duplicates();

使用这些扩展方法:

public static class Extensions
{
    public static IEnumerable<TSource> Duplicates<TSource, TKey>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source, Func<TSource, TKey> selector)
    {
        var grouped = source.GroupBy(selector);
        var moreThan1 = grouped.Where(i => i.IsMultiple());
        return moreThan1.SelectMany(i => i);
    }

    public static IEnumerable<TSource> Duplicates<TSource, TKey>(this IEnumerable<TSource> source)
    {
        return source.Duplicates(i => i);
    }

    public static bool IsMultiple<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source)
    {
        var enumerator = source.GetEnumerator();
        return enumerator.MoveNext() && enumerator.MoveNext();
    }
}

在duplicate方法中使用IsMultiple()比Count()更快，因为这不会迭代整个集合。