最好像这样使用关键字继续安全构造

int i=-1;
foreach (Object o in collection)
{
    ++i;
    //...
    continue; //<--- safe to call, index will be increased
    //...
}

这是我刚想到的解决这个问题的办法

原始代码:

int index=0;
foreach (var item in enumerable)
{
    blah(item, index); // some code that depends on the index
    index++;
}

更新代码

enumerable.ForEach((item, index) => blah(item, index));

扩展方法:

    public static IEnumerable<T> ForEach<T>(this IEnumerable<T> enumerable, Action<T, int> action)
    {
        var unit = new Unit(); // unit is a new type from the reactive framework (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/devlabs/ee794896.aspx) to represent a void, since in C# you can't return a void
        enumerable.Select((item, i) => 
            {
                action(item, i);
                return unit;
            }).ToList();

        return pSource;
    }

可以这样做:

public static class ForEachExtensions
{
    public static void ForEachWithIndex<T>(this IEnumerable<T> enumerable, Action<T, int> handler)
    {
        int idx = 0;
        foreach (T item in enumerable)
            handler(item, idx++);
    }
}

public class Example
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        string[] values = new[] { "foo", "bar", "baz" };

        values.ForEachWithIndex((item, idx) => Console.WriteLine("{0}: {1}", idx, item));
    }
}

我不确定你试图用基于问题的索引信息做什么。然而，在c#中，你通常可以使用IEnumerable。Select方法从您想要的任何内容中获取索引。例如，我可以使用类似这样的方法来判断一个值是奇数还是偶数。

string[] names = { "one", "two", "three" };
var oddOrEvenByName = names
    .Select((name, index) => new KeyValuePair<string, int>(name, index % 2))
    .ToDictionary(kvp => kvp.Key, kvp => kvp.Value);

这将根据列表中的项是奇数(1)还是偶数(0)的名称为您提供一个字典。

我只是遇到了这个问题，但在我的情况下思考这个问题给出了最好的解决方案，与预期的解决方案无关。

It could be quite a common case, basically, I'm reading from one source list and creating objects based on them in a destination list, however, I have to check whether the source items are valid first and want to return the row of any error. At first-glance, I want to get the index into the enumerator of the object at the Current property, however, as I am copying these elements, I implicitly know the current index anyway from the current destination. Obviously it depends on your destination object, but for me it was a List, and most likely it will implement ICollection.

i.e.

var destinationList = new List<someObject>();
foreach (var item in itemList)
{
  var stringArray = item.Split(new char[] { ';', ',' }, StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries);

  if (stringArray.Length != 2)
  {
    //use the destinationList Count property to give us the index into the stringArray list
    throw new Exception("Item at row " + (destinationList.Count + 1) + " has a problem.");
  }
  else
  {
    destinationList.Add(new someObject() { Prop1 = stringArray[0], Prop2 = stringArray[1]});
  }
}

我认为，虽然不总是适用，但常常足以值得一提。

不管怎样，关键是有时在你的逻辑中已经有了一个不明显的解决方案……

字面答案——警告，性能可能不如仅使用int来跟踪索引。至少它比使用IndexOf要好。

您只需要使用Select的索引重载，用一个知道索引的匿名对象来包装集合中的每个项。这可以针对任何实现IEnumerable的对象执行。

System.Collections.IEnumerable collection = Enumerable.Range(100, 10);

foreach (var o in collection.OfType<object>().Select((x, i) => new {x, i}))
{
    Console.WriteLine("{0} {1}", o.i, o.x);
}