我经常遇到这样的情况:我想在声明查询的地方对查询进行求值。这通常是因为我需要对它进行多次迭代，计算成本很高。例如:
string raw = "...";
var lines = (from l in raw.Split('\n')
let ll = l.Trim()
where !string.IsNullOrEmpty(ll)
select ll).ToList();
这很好。但是如果我不打算修改结果，那么我也可以调用ToArray()而不是ToList()。
然而，我想知道ToArray()是否通过首先调用ToList()来实现，因此内存效率比只调用ToList()低。
我疯了吗?我是否应该调用ToArray() -在知道内存不会被分配两次的情况下安全可靠?
当前回答
我同意@mquander的观点，性能差异应该是微不足道的。但是，我想对它进行基准测试，所以我这样做了——结果是微不足道的。
Testing with List<T> source:
ToArray time: 1934 ms (0.01934 ms/call), memory used: 4021 bytes/array
ToList time: 1902 ms (0.01902 ms/call), memory used: 4045 bytes/List
Testing with array source:
ToArray time: 1957 ms (0.01957 ms/call), memory used: 4021 bytes/array
ToList time: 2022 ms (0.02022 ms/call), memory used: 4045 bytes/List
每个源数组/列表有1000个元素。所以你可以看到时间和记忆的差异都可以忽略不计。
我的结论是:您还可以使用ToList()，因为List<T>提供了比数组更多的功能，除非几个字节的内存确实对您很重要。
其他回答
一种选择是添加自己的扩展方法，该方法返回一个只读的ICollection<T>。当您既不想使用数组/列表的索引属性，也不想从列表中添加/删除时，这可能比使用ToList或ToArray更好。
public static class EnumerableExtension
{
/// <summary>
/// Causes immediate evaluation of the linq but only if required.
/// As it returns a readonly ICollection, is better than using ToList or ToArray
/// when you do not want to use the indexing properties of an IList, or add to the collection.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T"></typeparam>
/// <param name="enumerable"></param>
/// <returns>Readonly collection</returns>
public static ICollection<T> Evaluate<T>(this IEnumerable<T> enumerable)
{
//if it's already a readonly collection, use it
var collection = enumerable as ICollection<T>;
if ((collection != null) && collection.IsReadOnly)
{
return collection;
}
//or make a new collection
return enumerable.ToList().AsReadOnly();
}
}
单元测试:
[TestClass]
public sealed class EvaluateLinqTests
{
[TestMethod]
public void EvalTest()
{
var list = new List<int> {1, 2, 3};
var linqResult = list.Select(i => i);
var linqResultEvaluated = list.Select(i => i).Evaluate();
list.Clear();
Assert.AreEqual(0, linqResult.Count());
//even though we have cleared the underlying list, the evaluated list does not change
Assert.AreEqual(3, linqResultEvaluated.Count());
}
[TestMethod]
public void DoesNotSaveCreatingListWhenHasListTest()
{
var list = new List<int> {1, 2, 3};
var linqResultEvaluated = list.Evaluate();
//list is not readonly, so we expect a new list
Assert.AreNotSame(list, linqResultEvaluated);
}
[TestMethod]
public void SavesCreatingListWhenHasReadonlyListTest()
{
var list = new List<int> {1, 2, 3}.AsReadOnly();
var linqResultEvaluated = list.Evaluate();
//list is readonly, so we don't expect a new list
Assert.AreSame(list, linqResultEvaluated);
}
[TestMethod]
public void SavesCreatingListWhenHasArrayTest()
{
var list = new[] {1, 2, 3};
var linqResultEvaluated = list.Evaluate();
//arrays are readonly (wrt ICollection<T> interface), so we don't expect a new object
Assert.AreSame(list, linqResultEvaluated);
}
[TestMethod]
[ExpectedException(typeof (NotSupportedException))]
public void CantAddToResultTest()
{
var list = new List<int> {1, 2, 3};
var linqResultEvaluated = list.Evaluate();
Assert.AreNotSame(list, linqResultEvaluated);
linqResultEvaluated.Add(4);
}
[TestMethod]
[ExpectedException(typeof (NotSupportedException))]
public void CantRemoveFromResultTest()
{
var list = new List<int> {1, 2, 3};
var linqResultEvaluated = list.Evaluate();
Assert.AreNotSame(list, linqResultEvaluated);
linqResultEvaluated.Remove(1);
}
}
我知道这是一个老帖子，但在有了同样的问题和做了一些研究之后，我发现了一些有趣的东西，可能值得分享。
首先，我同意@mquander和他的回答。在性能方面，两者是相同的。
但是，我一直在使用Reflector查看System.Linq.Enumerable扩展名称空间中的方法，并注意到一个非常常见的优化。 只要可能，IEnumerable<T>源就转换为IList<T>或ICollection<T>来优化方法。例如，查看ElementAt(int)。
有趣的是，微软选择只优化IList<T>，而不是IList。微软似乎更喜欢使用IList<T>接口。
编辑2:(这是对原始答案的更正)
使用基准。NET，我们可以通过性能测量来确认，公认的答案实际上是正确的:ToList在一般情况下更快，因为它不需要从已分配的缓冲区中修剪空空间。ToArray可能会执行额外的分配和复制操作，以使缓冲区的大小精确到元素的数量。
为了确认这一点，使用下面的基准测试。
[MemoryDiagnoser]
[ShortRunJob]
public class Benchmarks
{
[Params(0, 1, 6, 10, 42, 100, 1337, 10000)]
public int Count { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<int> Items => Enumerable.Range(0, Count).Where(i => i > 0);
[Benchmark(Baseline = true)]
public int[] ToArray() => Items.ToArray();
[Benchmark]
public List<int> ToList() => Items.ToList();
}
结果证实，在大多数情况下，ToList要快10% - 15%。
BenchmarkDotNet=v0.13.1, OS=Windows 10.0.22000
Intel Core i9-10885H CPU 2.40GHz, 1 CPU, 16 logical and 8 physical cores
.NET SDK=6.0.302
[Host] : .NET 6.0.7 (6.0.722.32202), X64 RyuJIT
DefaultJob : .NET 6.0.7 (6.0.722.32202), X64 RyuJIT
| Method | Count | Mean | Error | StdDev | Ratio | RatioSD | Gen 0 | Gen 1 | Allocated |
|-------- |------ |-------------:|-----------:|-----------:|------:|--------:|--------:|-------:|----------:|
| ToArray | 0 | 29.73 ns | 0.546 ns | 0.536 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0067 | - | 56 B |
| ToList | 0 | 31.51 ns | 0.485 ns | 0.405 ns | 1.06 | 0.02 | 0.0105 | - | 88 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 1 | 37.36 ns | 0.314 ns | 0.294 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0114 | - | 96 B |
| ToList | 1 | 36.75 ns | 0.605 ns | 0.537 ns | 0.98 | 0.01 | 0.0153 | - | 128 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 6 | 100.05 ns | 1.522 ns | 1.349 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0286 | - | 240 B |
| ToList | 6 | 85.16 ns | 0.808 ns | 0.756 ns | 0.85 | 0.01 | 0.0267 | - | 224 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 10 | 137.20 ns | 2.766 ns | 2.452 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0372 | - | 312 B |
| ToList | 10 | 123.05 ns | 2.198 ns | 1.949 ns | 0.90 | 0.01 | 0.0372 | - | 312 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 42 | 398.25 ns | 6.583 ns | 5.836 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0877 | - | 736 B |
| ToList | 42 | 352.04 ns | 4.976 ns | 4.411 ns | 0.88 | 0.02 | 0.0887 | - | 744 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 100 | 730.80 ns | 6.501 ns | 6.081 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.1488 | - | 1,248 B |
| ToList | 100 | 705.49 ns | 9.947 ns | 9.305 ns | 0.97 | 0.01 | 0.1526 | - | 1,280 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 1337 | 8,023.57 ns | 147.388 ns | 137.867 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.6785 | 0.0458 | 14,056 B |
| ToList | 1337 | 7,980.27 ns | 138.469 ns | 122.749 ns | 1.00 | 0.02 | 1.9989 | 0.1221 | 16,736 B |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray | 10000 | 57,037.19 ns | 510.492 ns | 452.538 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 12.6343 | 1.7700 | 106,280 B |
| ToList | 10000 | 57,728.15 ns | 583.353 ns | 517.127 ns | 1.01 | 0.01 | 15.5640 | 5.1270 | 131,496 B |
作为参考，下面是原始答案，不幸的是，它只在一个非常特殊的情况下执行基准测试，避免了中间的调整大小和复制操作。
最初的回答:
现在已经是2020年了，每个人都在使用。net Core 3.1，所以我决定用Benchmark.NET运行一些基准测试。
TL;DR: ToArray()在性能方面更好，如果不打算改变集合，则可以更好地传达意图。
编辑:从注释中可以看出，这些基准测试可能不是指示性的，因为Enumerable.Range(…)返回一个IEnumerable<T>，其中包含关于序列大小的信息，随后在ToArray()的优化中使用它来预分配正确大小的数组。考虑为您的具体场景手动测试性能。
[MemoryDiagnoser]
public class Benchmarks
{
[Params(0, 1, 6, 10, 39, 100, 666, 1000, 1337, 10000)]
public int Count { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<int> Items => Enumerable.Range(0, Count);
[Benchmark(Description = "ToArray()", Baseline = true)]
public int[] ToArray() => Items.ToArray();
[Benchmark(Description = "ToList()")]
public List<int> ToList() => Items.ToList();
public static void Main() => BenchmarkRunner.Run<Benchmarks>();
}
结果如下:
BenchmarkDotNet=v0.12.0, OS=Windows 10.0.14393.3443 (1607/AnniversaryUpdate/Redstone1)
Intel Core i5-4460 CPU 3.20GHz (Haswell), 1 CPU, 4 logical and 4 physical cores
Frequency=3124994 Hz, Resolution=320.0006 ns, Timer=TSC
.NET Core SDK=3.1.100
[Host] : .NET Core 3.1.0 (CoreCLR 4.700.19.56402, CoreFX 4.700.19.56404), X64 RyuJIT
DefaultJob : .NET Core 3.1.0 (CoreCLR 4.700.19.56402, CoreFX 4.700.19.56404), X64 RyuJIT
| Method | Count | Mean | Error | StdDev | Median | Ratio | RatioSD | Gen 0 | Gen 1 | Gen 2 | Allocated |
|---------- |------ |--------------:|------------:|------------:|--------------:|------:|--------:|--------:|------:|------:|----------:|
| ToArray() | 0 | 7.357 ns | 0.2096 ns | 0.1960 ns | 7.323 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | - | - | - | - |
| ToList() | 0 | 13.174 ns | 0.2094 ns | 0.1958 ns | 13.084 ns | 1.79 | 0.05 | 0.0102 | - | - | 32 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 1 | 23.917 ns | 0.4999 ns | 0.4676 ns | 23.954 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0229 | - | - | 72 B |
| ToList() | 1 | 33.867 ns | 0.7350 ns | 0.6876 ns | 34.013 ns | 1.42 | 0.04 | 0.0331 | - | - | 104 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 6 | 28.242 ns | 0.5071 ns | 0.4234 ns | 28.196 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0280 | - | - | 88 B |
| ToList() | 6 | 43.516 ns | 0.9448 ns | 1.1949 ns | 42.896 ns | 1.56 | 0.06 | 0.0382 | - | - | 120 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 10 | 31.636 ns | 0.5408 ns | 0.4516 ns | 31.657 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0331 | - | - | 104 B |
| ToList() | 10 | 53.870 ns | 1.2988 ns | 2.2403 ns | 53.415 ns | 1.77 | 0.07 | 0.0433 | - | - | 136 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 39 | 58.896 ns | 0.9441 ns | 0.8369 ns | 58.548 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.0713 | - | - | 224 B |
| ToList() | 39 | 138.054 ns | 2.8185 ns | 3.2458 ns | 138.937 ns | 2.35 | 0.08 | 0.0815 | - | - | 256 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 100 | 119.167 ns | 1.6195 ns | 1.4357 ns | 119.120 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.1478 | - | - | 464 B |
| ToList() | 100 | 274.053 ns | 5.1073 ns | 4.7774 ns | 272.242 ns | 2.30 | 0.06 | 0.1578 | - | - | 496 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 666 | 569.920 ns | 11.4496 ns | 11.2450 ns | 571.647 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.8688 | - | - | 2728 B |
| ToList() | 666 | 1,621.752 ns | 17.1176 ns | 16.0118 ns | 1,623.566 ns | 2.85 | 0.05 | 0.8793 | - | - | 2760 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 1000 | 796.705 ns | 16.7091 ns | 19.8910 ns | 796.610 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.2951 | - | - | 4064 B |
| ToList() | 1000 | 2,453.110 ns | 48.1121 ns | 65.8563 ns | 2,460.190 ns | 3.09 | 0.10 | 1.3046 | - | - | 4096 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 1337 | 1,057.983 ns | 20.9810 ns | 41.4145 ns | 1,041.028 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 1.7223 | - | - | 5416 B |
| ToList() | 1337 | 3,217.550 ns | 62.3777 ns | 61.2633 ns | 3,203.928 ns | 2.98 | 0.13 | 1.7357 | - | - | 5448 B |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ToArray() | 10000 | 7,309.844 ns | 160.0343 ns | 141.8662 ns | 7,279.387 ns | 1.00 | 0.00 | 12.6572 | - | - | 40064 B |
| ToList() | 10000 | 23,858.032 ns | 389.6592 ns | 364.4874 ns | 23,759.001 ns | 3.26 | 0.08 | 12.6343 | - | - | 40096 B |
// * Hints *
Outliers
Benchmarks.ToArray(): Default -> 2 outliers were removed (35.20 ns, 35.29 ns)
Benchmarks.ToArray(): Default -> 2 outliers were removed (38.51 ns, 38.88 ns)
Benchmarks.ToList(): Default -> 1 outlier was removed (64.69 ns)
Benchmarks.ToArray(): Default -> 1 outlier was removed (67.02 ns)
Benchmarks.ToArray(): Default -> 1 outlier was removed (130.08 ns)
Benchmarks.ToArray(): Default -> 1 outlier was detected (541.82 ns)
Benchmarks.ToArray(): Default -> 1 outlier was removed (7.82 us)
// * Legends *
Count : Value of the 'Count' parameter
Mean : Arithmetic mean of all measurements
Error : Half of 99.9% confidence interval
StdDev : Standard deviation of all measurements
Median : Value separating the higher half of all measurements (50th percentile)
Ratio : Mean of the ratio distribution ([Current]/[Baseline])
RatioSD : Standard deviation of the ratio distribution ([Current]/[Baseline])
Gen 0 : GC Generation 0 collects per 1000 operations
Gen 1 : GC Generation 1 collects per 1000 operations
Gen 2 : GC Generation 2 collects per 1000 operations
Allocated : Allocated memory per single operation (managed only, inclusive, 1KB = 1024B)
1 ns : 1 Nanosecond (0.000000001 sec)
这是一个老问题了——但是为了方便无意中发现它的用户，还有一种“Memoizing”Enumerable的替代方案——它具有缓存和停止Linq语句的多个枚举的效果，这就是ToArray()和ToList()经常被使用的原因，即使列表或数组的集合属性从未被使用。
Memoize在RX/System中可用。交互式库，并在这里解释: 更多LINQ与系统。互动
(摘自Bart De 's met的博客，如果你经常使用Linq to Objects，强烈推荐你阅读)
性能差异并不显著，因为List<T>是作为动态大小的数组实现的。调用ToArray()(它使用内部Buffer<T>类来增长数组)或ToList()(它调用List<T>(IEnumerable<T>)构造函数)将最终成为将它们放入数组并增长数组直到适合它们为止的问题。
如果您希望具体确认这一事实，请查看Reflector中所讨论的方法的实现——您将看到它们的代码几乎完全相同。
