STL is a heavily optimized library. In fact, it's even suggested to use STL in games where high performance might be needed. Arrays are too error prone to be used in day to day tasks. Today's compilers are also very smart and can really produce excellent code with STL. If you know what you are doing, STL can usually provide the necessary performance. For example by initializing vectors to required size (if you know from start), you can basically achieve the array performance. However, there might be cases where you still need arrays. When interfacing with low level code (i.e. assembly) or old libraries that require arrays, you might not be able to use vectors.

STL is a heavily optimized library. In fact, it's even suggested to use STL in games where high performance might be needed. Arrays are too error prone to be used in day to day tasks. Today's compilers are also very smart and can really produce excellent code with STL. If you know what you are doing, STL can usually provide the necessary performance. For example by initializing vectors to required size (if you know from start), you can basically achieve the array performance. However, there might be cases where you still need arrays. When interfacing with low level code (i.e. assembly) or old libraries that require arrays, you might not be able to use vectors.

两者之间的性能差异很大程度上取决于实现——如果你比较一个实现得很差的std::vector和一个优化的数组实现，数组会赢，但是反过来，vector会赢……

As long as you compare apples with apples (either both the array and the vector have a fixed number of elements, or both get resized dynamically) I would think that the performance difference is negligible as long as you follow got STL coding practise. Don't forget that using standard C++ containers also allows you to make use of the pre-rolled algorithms that are part of the standard C++ library and most of them are likely to be better performing than the average implementation of the same algorithm you build yourself.

也就是说，以我之见，vector在使用调试STL的调试场景中胜出，因为大多数具有适当调试模式的STL实现至少可以突出/清除人们在使用标准容器时所犯的典型错误。

哦，不要忘记数组和vector共享相同的内存布局，因此您可以使用vector将数据传递给需要基本数组的遗留C或c++代码。但是，请记住，在这种情况下，大多数赌注都是无效的，您将再次处理原始内存。

当你想要一个未初始化的缓冲区(例如用作memcpy()的目标)时，使用std::vector与使用raw数组肯定会有性能影响。vector将使用默认构造函数初始化其所有元素。原始数组则不会。

c++规范中std:vector构造函数接受count参数(这是第三种形式):

从各种数据源构造一个新容器，可选地使用用户提供的分配器alloc。

使用默认插入的t的count个实例构造容器。

复杂性

2-3)计数线性

原始数组不会产生这种初始化代价。

注意，使用自定义分配器，可以避免vector元素的“初始化”(即使用默认初始化而不是值初始化)。请看这些问题了解更多细节:

这是c++ 11和Boost下vector::resize(size_type n)的行为吗?容器正确吗? 如何避免std::vector<>来初始化它的所有元素?

可能会有一些边缘情况，你在内联函数中有一个向量访问在内联函数中，你已经超出了编译器将内联的范围，它将强制函数调用。这种情况太罕见了，不值得担心——总的来说，我同意litb的观点。

我很惊讶居然没有人提到这一点——不要担心性能，直到它被证明是一个问题，然后进行基准测试。

为了回应Mehrdad说过的话:

然而，在某些情况下 你仍然需要数组。当 与低级代码(例如: 程序集)或旧的库 需要数组，您可能无法 用向量。

完全不是这样的。向量可以很好地降级为数组/指针，如果你使用:

vector<double> vector;
vector.push_back(42);

double *array = &(*vector.begin());

// pass the array to whatever low-level code you have

这适用于所有主要的STL实现。在下一个标准中，它将被要求工作(即使它现在做得很好)。