使用基于Fisher-Yates Shuffle的扩展方法Shuffle任意(I)List:

private static Random rng = new Random();  

public static void Shuffle<T>(this IList<T> list)  
{  
    int n = list.Count;  
    while (n > 1) {  
        n--;  
        int k = rng.Next(n + 1);  
        T value = list[k];  
        list[k] = list[n];  
        list[n] = value;  
    }  
}

用法:

List<Product> products = GetProducts();
products.Shuffle();

上面的代码使用了备受批评的系统。选择交换候选的随机方法。它速度很快，但并不像它应该的那样随机。如果你需要更好的随机质量，可以使用System.Security.Cryptography中的随机数生成器，如下所示:

using System.Security.Cryptography;
...
public static void Shuffle<T>(this IList<T> list)
{
    RNGCryptoServiceProvider provider = new RNGCryptoServiceProvider();
    int n = list.Count;
    while (n > 1)
    {
        byte[] box = new byte[1];
        do provider.GetBytes(box);
        while (!(box[0] < n * (Byte.MaxValue / n)));
        int k = (box[0] % n);
        n--;
        T value = list[k];
        list[k] = list[n];
        list[n] = value;
    }
}

一个简单的比较可以在这个博客(WayBack Machine)上找到。

Edit: Since writing this answer a couple years back, many people have commented or written to me, to point out the big silly flaw in my comparison. They are of course right. There's nothing wrong with System.Random if it's used in the way it was intended. In my first example above, I instantiate the rng variable inside of the Shuffle method, which is asking for trouble if the method is going to be called repeatedly. Below is a fixed, full example based on a really useful comment received today from @weston here on SO.

Program.cs:

using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Threading;

namespace SimpleLottery
{
  class Program
  {
    private static void Main(string[] args)
    {
      var numbers = new List<int>(Enumerable.Range(1, 75));
      numbers.Shuffle();
      Console.WriteLine("The winning numbers are: {0}", string.Join(",  ", numbers.GetRange(0, 5)));
    }
  }

  public static class ThreadSafeRandom
  {
      [ThreadStatic] private static Random Local;

      public static Random ThisThreadsRandom
      {
          get { return Local ?? (Local = new Random(unchecked(Environment.TickCount * 31 + Thread.CurrentThread.ManagedThreadId))); }
      }
  }

  static class MyExtensions
  {
    public static void Shuffle<T>(this IList<T> list)
    {
      int n = list.Count;
      while (n > 1)
      {
        n--;
        int k = ThreadSafeRandom.ThisThreadsRandom.Next(n + 1);
        T value = list[k];
        list[k] = list[n];
        list[n] = value;
      }
    }
  }
}

    List<T> OriginalList = new List<T>();
    List<T> TempList = new List<T>();
    Random random = new Random();
    int length = OriginalList.Count;
    int TempIndex = 0;

    while (length > 0) {
        TempIndex = random.Next(0, length);  // get random value between 0 and original length
        TempList.Add(OriginalList[TempIndex]); // add to temp list
        OriginalList.RemoveAt(TempIndex); // remove from original list
        length = OriginalList.Count;  // get new list <T> length.
    }

    OriginalList = new List<T>();
    OriginalList = TempList; // copy all items from temp list to original list.

I'm bit surprised by all the clunky versions of this simple algorithm here. Fisher-Yates (or Knuth shuffle) is bit tricky but very compact. Why is it tricky? Because your need to pay attention to whether your random number generator r(a,b) returns value where b is inclusive or exclusive. I've also edited Wikipedia description so people don't blindly follow pseudocode there and create hard to detect bugs. For .Net, Random.Next(a,b) returns number exclusive of b so without further ado, here's how it can be implemented in C#/.Net:

public static void Shuffle<T>(this IList<T> list, Random rnd)
{
    for(var i=list.Count; i > 0; i--)
        list.Swap(0, rnd.Next(0, i));
}

public static void Swap<T>(this IList<T> list, int i, int j)
{
    var temp = list[i];
    list[i] = list[j];
    list[j] = temp;
}

试试这段代码。

IEnumerable扩展方法:

public static IEnumerable<T> Randomize<T>(this IEnumerable<T> source)
{
    Random rnd = new Random();
    return source.OrderBy<T, int>((item) => rnd.Next());
}

解决这类问题的一个非常简单的方法是在列表中使用一些随机的元素交换。

在伪代码中是这样的:

do 
    r1 = randomPositionInList()
    r2 = randomPositionInList()
    swap elements at index r1 and index r2 
for a certain number of times

您可以使用这个简单的扩展方法来实现这一点

public static class IEnumerableExtensions
{

    public static IEnumerable<t> Randomize<t>(this IEnumerable<t> target)
    {
        Random r = new Random();

        return target.OrderBy(x=>(r.Next()));
    }        
}

你可以通过下面的步骤来使用它

// use this on any collection that implements IEnumerable!
// List, Array, HashSet, Collection, etc

List<string> myList = new List<string> { "hello", "random", "world", "foo", "bar", "bat", "baz" };

foreach (string s in myList.Randomize())
{
    Console.WriteLine(s);
}