Is there an easy way to create ordinals in C#?

This page gives you a complete listing of all custom numerical formatting rules:

Custom numeric format strings

As you can see, there is nothing in there about ordinals, so it can't be done using String.Format. However its not really that hard to write a function to do it.

public static string AddOrdinal(int num)
{
    if( num <= 0 ) return num.ToString();

    switch(num % 100)
    {
        case 11:
        case 12:
        case 13:
            return num + "th";
    }
    
    switch(num % 10)
    {
        case 1:
            return num + "st";
        case 2:
            return num + "nd";
        case 3:
            return num + "rd";
        default:
            return num + "th";
    }
}

Update: Technically Ordinals don't exist for <= 0, so I've updated the code above. Also removed the redundant ToString() methods.

Also note, this is not internationalized. I've no idea what ordinals look like in other languages.

Remember internationalisation!

The solutions here only work for English. Things get a lot more complex if you need to support other languages.

For example, in Spanish "1st" would be written as "1.o", "1.a", "1.os" or "1.as" depending on whether the thing you're counting is masculine, feminine or plural!

So if your software needs to support different languages, try to avoid ordinals.

My version of Jesse's version of Stu's and samjudson's versions :)

Included unit test to show that the accepted answer is incorrect when number < 1

/// <summary>
/// Get the ordinal value of positive integers.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// Only works for english-based cultures.
/// Code from: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/20156/is-there-a-quick-way-to-create-ordinals-in-c/31066#31066
/// With help: http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-ordinal-number.htm
/// </remarks>
/// <param name="number">The number.</param>
/// <returns>Ordinal value of positive integers, or <see cref="int.ToString"/> if less than 1.</returns>
public static string Ordinal(this int number)
{
    const string TH = "th";
    string s = number.ToString();

    // Negative and zero have no ordinal representation
    if (number < 1)
    {
        return s;
    }

    number %= 100;
    if ((number >= 11) && (number <= 13))
    {
        return s + TH;
    }

    switch (number % 10)
    {
        case 1: return s + "st";
        case 2: return s + "nd";
        case 3: return s + "rd";
        default: return s + TH;
    }
}

[Test]
public void Ordinal_ReturnsExpectedResults()
{
    Assert.AreEqual("-1", (1-2).Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("0", 0.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("1st", 1.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("2nd", 2.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("3rd", 3.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("4th", 4.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("5th", 5.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("6th", 6.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("7th", 7.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("8th", 8.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("9th", 9.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("10th", 10.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("11th", 11.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("12th", 12.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("13th", 13.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("14th", 14.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("20th", 20.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("21st", 21.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("22nd", 22.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("23rd", 23.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("24th", 24.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("100th", 100.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("101st", 101.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("102nd", 102.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("103rd", 103.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("104th", 104.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("110th", 110.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("111th", 111.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("112th", 112.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("113th", 113.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("114th", 114.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("120th", 120.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("121st", 121.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("122nd", 122.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("123rd", 123.Ordinal());
    Assert.AreEqual("124th", 124.Ordinal());
}

You'll have to roll your own. From the top of my head:

public static string Ordinal(this int number)
{
  var work = number.ToString();
  if ((number % 100) == 11 || (number % 100) == 12 || (number % 100) == 13)
    return work + "th";
  switch (number % 10)
  {
    case 1: work += "st"; break;
    case 2: work += "nd"; break;
    case 3: work += "rd"; break;
    default: work += "th"; break;
  }
  return work;
}

You can then do

Console.WriteLine(432.Ordinal());

Edited for 11/12/13 exceptions. I DID say from the top of my head :-)

Edited for 1011 -- others have fixed this already, just want to make sure others don't grab this incorrect version.

I rather liked elements from both Stu's and samjudson's solutions and worked them together into what I think is a usable combo:

public static string Ordinal(this int number)
{
    const string TH = "th";
    var s = number.ToString();
    
    number %= 100;
    
    if ((number >= 11) && (number <= 13))
    {
        return s + TH;
    }
   
    switch (number % 10)
    {
        case 1:
            return s + "st";
        case 2:
            return s + "nd";
        case 3:
            return s + "rd";
        default:
            return s + TH;
    }
}

While I haven't benchmarked this yet, you should be able to get better performance by avoiding all the conditional case statements.

This is java, but a port to C# is trivial:

public class NumberUtil {
  final static String[] ORDINAL_SUFFIXES = {
    "th", "st", "nd", "rd", "th", "th", "th", "th", "th", "th"
  };

  public static String ordinalSuffix(int value) {
    int n = Math.abs(value);
    int lastTwoDigits = n % 100;
    int lastDigit = n % 10;
    int index = (lastTwoDigits >= 11 && lastTwoDigits <= 13) ? 0 : lastDigit;
    return ORDINAL_SUFFIXES[index];
  }

  public static String toOrdinal(int n) {
    return new StringBuffer().append(n).append(ordinalSuffix(n)).toString();
  }
}

Note, the reduction of conditionals and the use of the array lookup should speed up performance if generating a lot of ordinals in a tight loop. However, I also concede that this isn't as readable as the case statement solution.

While there are plenty of good answers in here, I guess there is room for another one, this time based on pattern matching, if not for anything else, then at least for debatable readability

public static string Ordinals1(this int number)
{
    switch (number)
    {
        case int p when p % 100 == 11:
        case int q when q % 100 == 12:
        case int r when r % 100 == 13:
            return $"{number}th";
        case int p when p % 10 == 1:
            return $"{number}st";
        case int p when p % 10 == 2:
            return $"{number}nd";
        case int p when p % 10 == 3:
            return $"{number}rd";
        default:
            return $"{number}th";
    }
}

and what makes this solution special? nothing but the fact that I'm adding some performance considerations for various other solutions

frankly I doubt performance really matters for this particular scenario (who really needs the ordinals of millions of numbers) but at least it surfaces some comparisons to be taken into account...

1 million items for reference (your millage may vary based on machine specs of course)

with pattern matching and divisions (this answer)

~622 ms

with pattern matching and strings (this answer)

~1967 ms

with two switches and divisions (accepted answer)

~637 ms

with one switch and divisions (another answer)

~725 ms

void Main()
{
    var timer = new Stopwatch();
    var numbers = Enumerable.Range(1, 1000000).ToList();

    // 1
    timer.Reset();
    timer.Start();
    var results1 = numbers.Select(p => p.Ordinals1()).ToList();
    timer.Stop();
    timer.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds.Dump("with pattern matching and divisions");

    // 2
    timer.Reset();
    timer.Start();
    var results2 = numbers.Select(p => p.Ordinals2()).ToList();
    timer.Stop();
    timer.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds.Dump("with pattern matching and strings");

    // 3
    timer.Reset();
    timer.Start();
    var results3 = numbers.Select(p => p.Ordinals3()).ToList();
    timer.Stop();
    timer.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds.Dump("with two switches and divisons");
    
    // 4
    timer.Reset();
    timer.Start();
    var results4 = numbers.Select(p => p.Ordinals4()).ToList();
    timer.Stop();
    timer.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds.Dump("with one switche and divisons");
}

public static class Extensions
{
    public static string Ordinals1(this int number)
    {
        switch (number)
        {
            case int p when p % 100 == 11:
            case int q when q % 100 == 12:
            case int r when r % 100 == 13:
                return $"{number}th";
            case int p when p % 10 == 1:
                return $"{number}st";
            case int p when p % 10 == 2:
                return $"{number}nd";
            case int p when p % 10 == 3:
                return $"{number}rd";
            default:
                return $"{number}th";
        }
    }

    public static string Ordinals2(this int number)
    {
        var text = number.ToString();
        switch (text)
        {
            case string p when p.EndsWith("11"):
                return $"{number}th";
            case string p when p.EndsWith("12"):
                return $"{number}th";
            case string p when p.EndsWith("13"):
                return $"{number}th";
            case string p when p.EndsWith("1"):
                return $"{number}st";
            case string p when p.EndsWith("2"):
                return $"{number}nd";
            case string p when p.EndsWith("3"):
                return $"{number}rd";
            default:
                return $"{number}th";
        }
    }

    public static string Ordinals3(this int number)
    {
        switch (number % 100)
        {
            case 11:
            case 12:
            case 13:
                return $"{number}th";
        }

        switch (number % 10)
        {
            case 1:
                return $"{number}st";
            case 2:
                return $"{number}nd";
            case 3:
                return $"{number}rd";
            default:
                return $"{number}th";
        }
    }

    public static string Ordinals4(this int number)
    {
        var ones = number % 10;
        var tens = Math.Floor(number / 10f) % 10;
        if (tens == 1)
        {
            return $"{number}th";
        }

        switch (ones)
        {
            case 1:
                return $"{number}th";
            case 2:
                return $"{number}nd";
            case 3:
                return $"{number}rd";
            default:
                return $"{number}th";
        }
    }
}

The Humanizer nuget package will provide helper methods for you. Disclaimer, I am a contributor to this project.

Ordinalize turns a number into an ordinal string used to denote the position in an ordered sequence such as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th:

1.Ordinalize() => "1st"
5.Ordinalize() => "5th"

You can also call Ordinalize on a numeric string and achieve the same result: "21".Ordinalize() => "21st"

Ordinalize also supports grammatical gender for both forms. You can pass an argument to Ordinalize to specify which gender the number should be outputted in. The possible values are GrammaticalGender.Masculine, GrammaticalGender.Feminine and GrammaticalGender.Neuter:

// for Brazilian Portuguese locale
1.Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Masculine) => "1º"
1.Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Feminine) => "1ª"
1.Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Neuter) => "1º"
"2".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Masculine) => "2º"
"2".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Feminine) => "2ª"
"2".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Neuter) => "2º"

Obviously this only applies to some cultures. For others passing gender in or not passing at all doesn't make any difference in the result.

In addition, Ordinalize supports variations some cultures apply depending on the position of the ordinalized number in a sentence. Use the argument wordForm to get one result or another. Possible values are WordForm.Abbreviation and WordForm.Normal. You can combine wordForm argument with gender but passing this argument in when it is not applicable will not make any difference in the result.

// Spanish locale
1.Ordinalize(WordForm.Abbreviation) => "1.er" // As in "Vivo en el 1.er piso"
1.Ordinalize(WordForm.Normal) => "1.º" // As in "He llegado el 1º"
"3".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Feminine, WordForm.Abbreviation) => "3.ª"
"3".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Feminine, WordForm.Normal) => "3.ª"
"3".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Masculine, WordForm.Abbreviation) => "3.er"
"3".Ordinalize(GrammaticalGender.Masculine, WordForm.Normal) => "3.º"

If you want to go deeper, check those test cases: OrdinalizeTests.cs

This is the implementation in dart and can be modified according to the language.

String getOrdinalSuffix(int num){
    if (num.toString().endsWith("11")) return "th";
    if (num.toString().endsWith("12")) return "th";
    if (num.toString().endsWith("13")) return "th";
    if (num.toString().endsWith("1")) return "st";
    if (num.toString().endsWith("2")) return "nd";
    if (num.toString().endsWith("3")) return "rd";
    return "th";
}

Another one-liner, but without comparisons by only indexing the regex result into an array.

public static string GetOrdinalSuffix(int input)
{
    return new []{"th", "st", "nd", "rd"}[Convert.ToInt32("0" + Regex.Match(input.ToString(), "(?<!1)[1-3]$").Value)];
}

The PowerShell version can be shortened further:

function ord($num) { return ('th','st','nd','rd')[[int]($num -match '(?<!1)[1-3]$') * $matches[0]] }

Another 1 liner.

public static string Ordinal(this int n)
{    
 return n + (new [] {"st","nd","rd" }.ElementAtOrDefault((((n + 90) % 100 - 10) % 10 - 1)) ?? "th");
}

The accepted answer with switch-expressions and pattern-matching from c# 8 and 9.

No unneeded string conversion or allocations.

string.Concat(number, number < 0 ? "" : (number % 100) switch 
{   
    11 or 12 or 13 => "th", 
    int n => (n % 10) switch 
    { 
        1 => "st", 
        2 => "nd", 
        3 => "rd", 
        _ => "th", 
    }
})

Or as unfriendly one-liner:

$"{number}{(number < 0 ? "" : (number % 100) switch { 11 or 12 or 13 => "th", int n => (n % 10) switch { 1 => "st", 2 => "nd", 3 => "rd", _ => "th" }})}"