我尝试了准确的类型检查结构

typeof(int) == item. gettype()，它的执行速度与项目为int版本一样快，并且总是返回数字(强调:即使你向数组写入了Nullable<int>，你也需要使用typeof(int))。这里还需要一个额外的null !=项检查。

然而

typeof(int?) == item. gettype()保持较快(相对于item is int?)，但总是返回false。

在我看来，typef -construct是精确类型检查的最快方法，因为它使用了RuntimeTypeHandle。由于这种情况下的确切类型与nullable不匹配，我的猜测是，is/as必须在这里做额外的繁重工作，以确保它实际上是nullable类型的实例。

老实说:你的is Nullable<xxx> + HasValue给你买了什么?没什么。您总是可以直接转到基础(值)类型(在本例中)。你要么得到值，要么“不，不是你要的类型的实例”。即使您将(int?)null写入数组，类型检查也将返回false。

我没有时间尝试，但你可能想要:

foreach (object o in values)
        {
            int? x = o as int?;

as

int? x;
foreach (object o in values)
        {
            x = o as int?;

您每次都在创建一个新对象，这不能完全解释问题，但可能有助于解决问题。

显然，JIT编译器为第一种情况生成的机器代码要高效得多。一个真正有用的规则是，一个对象只能被解箱为与被装箱值具有相同类型的变量。这允许JIT编译器生成非常高效的代码，不需要考虑值转换。

is操作符测试很简单，只需检查对象是否为空并且是预期的类型，只需要一些机器代码指令。强制转换也很容易，JIT编译器知道值位在对象中的位置，并直接使用它们。没有复制或转换，所有的机器代码都是内联的，只需要大约十几个指令。这需要在。net 1.0中非常有效，当时装箱很常见。

Casting to int? takes a lot more work. The value representation of the boxed integer is not compatible with the memory layout of Nullable<int>. A conversion is required and the code is tricky due to possible boxed enum types. The JIT compiler generates a call to a CLR helper function named JIT_Unbox_Nullable to get the job done. This is a general purpose function for any value type, lots of code there to check types. And the value is copied. Hard to estimate the cost since this code is locked up inside mscorwks.dll, but hundreds of machine code instructions is likely.

Linq的OfType()扩展方法也使用is操作符和强制转换。然而，这是一个泛型类型的强制转换。JIT编译器生成对辅助函数JIT_Unbox()的调用，该函数可以执行到任意值类型的强制转换。我没有很好的解释为什么它像强制转换为Nullable<int>一样慢，因为应该需要更少的工作。我怀疑ngen.exe可能会在这里造成麻烦。

在我看来，isinst在可空类型上真的很慢。在FindSumWithCast方法中我改变了

if (o is int)

to

if (o is int?)

这也大大降低了执行速度。我能看到的IL的唯一不同是

isinst     [mscorlib]System.Int32

变为

isinst     valuetype [mscorlib]System.Nullable`1<int32>

进一步分析:

using System;
using System.Diagnostics;

class Program
{
    const int Size = 30000000;

    static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        object[] values = new object[Size];
        for (int i = 0; i < Size - 2; i += 3)
        {
            values[i] = null;
            values[i + 1] = "";
            values[i + 2] = 1;
        }

        FindSumWithIsThenCast(values);

        FindSumWithAsThenHasThenValue(values);
        FindSumWithAsThenHasThenCast(values);

        FindSumWithManualAs(values);
        FindSumWithAsThenManualHasThenValue(values);



        Console.ReadLine();
    }

    static void FindSumWithIsThenCast(object[] values)
    {
        Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int sum = 0;
        foreach (object o in values)
        {
            if (o is int)
            {
                int x = (int)o;
                sum += x;
            }
        }
        sw.Stop();
        Console.WriteLine("Is then Cast: {0} : {1}", sum,
                            (long)sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
    }

    static void FindSumWithAsThenHasThenValue(object[] values)
    {
        Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int sum = 0;
        foreach (object o in values)
        {
            int? x = o as int?;

            if (x.HasValue)
            {
                sum += x.Value;
            }
        }
        sw.Stop();
        Console.WriteLine("As then Has then Value: {0} : {1}", sum,
                            (long)sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
    }

    static void FindSumWithAsThenHasThenCast(object[] values)
    {
        Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int sum = 0;
        foreach (object o in values)
        {
            int? x = o as int?;

            if (x.HasValue)
            {
                sum += (int)o;
            }
        }
        sw.Stop();
        Console.WriteLine("As then Has then Cast: {0} : {1}", sum,
                            (long)sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
    }

    static void FindSumWithManualAs(object[] values)
    {
        Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int sum = 0;
        foreach (object o in values)
        {
            bool hasValue = o is int;
            int x = hasValue ? (int)o : 0;

            if (hasValue)
            {
                sum += x;
            }
        }
        sw.Stop();
        Console.WriteLine("Manual As: {0} : {1}", sum,
                            (long)sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
    }

    static void FindSumWithAsThenManualHasThenValue(object[] values)
    {
        Stopwatch sw = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int sum = 0;
        foreach (object o in values)
        {
            int? x = o as int?;

            if (o is int)
            {
                sum += x.Value;
            }
        }
        sw.Stop();
        Console.WriteLine("As then Manual Has then Value: {0} : {1}", sum,
                            (long)sw.ElapsedMilliseconds);
    }

}

输出:

Is then Cast: 10000000 : 303
As then Has then Value: 10000000 : 3524
As then Has then Cast: 10000000 : 3272
Manual As: 10000000 : 395
As then Manual Has then Value: 10000000 : 3282

我们能从这些数字中推断出什么?

First, is-then-cast approach is significantly faster than as approach. 303 vs 3524 Second, .Value is marginally slower than casting. 3524 vs 3272 Third, .HasValue is marginally slower than using manual has(i.e. using is). 3524 vs 3282 Fourth, doing an apple-to-apple comparison(i.e. both assigning of simulated HasValue and converting simulated Value happens together) between simulated as and real as approach, we can see simulated as is still significantly faster than real as. 395 vs 3524 Lastly, based on first and fourth conclusion, there's something wrong with as implementation ^_^

有趣的是，对于Nullable<T>(类似于早期的测试)，我通过dynamic传递了关于操作符支持的反馈——我怀疑是出于非常相似的原因。

爱上Nullable<T>。另一个有趣的是，即使JIT发现(并删除)非空结构的null，它也会对Nullable<T>使用它:

using System;
using System.Diagnostics;
static class Program {
    static void Main() { 
        // JIT
        TestUnrestricted<int>(1,5);
        TestUnrestricted<string>("abc",5);
        TestUnrestricted<int?>(1,5);
        TestNullable<int>(1, 5);

        const int LOOP = 100000000;
        Console.WriteLine(TestUnrestricted<int>(1, LOOP));
        Console.WriteLine(TestUnrestricted<string>("abc", LOOP));
        Console.WriteLine(TestUnrestricted<int?>(1, LOOP));
        Console.WriteLine(TestNullable<int>(1, LOOP));

    }
    static long TestUnrestricted<T>(T x, int loop) {
        Stopwatch watch = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int count = 0;
        for (int i = 0; i < loop; i++) {
            if (x != null) count++;
        }
        watch.Stop();
        return watch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
    }
    static long TestNullable<T>(T? x, int loop) where T : struct {
        Stopwatch watch = Stopwatch.StartNew();
        int count = 0;
        for (int i = 0; i < loop; i++) {
            if (x != null) count++;
        }
        watch.Stop();
        return watch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
    }
}