instanceof非常快，只需要几个CPU指令。

显然，如果一个类X没有加载子类(JVM知道)，instanceof可以被优化为:

     x instanceof X    
==>  x.getClass()==X.class  
==>  x.classID == constant_X_ID

主要的花费只是阅读!

如果X确实加载了子类，则需要更多的读取操作;他们可能住在一起，所以额外的费用也很低。

大家好!

Instanceof非常快。它可以归结为用于类引用比较的字节码。在一个循环中尝试几百万个实例，自己看看。

'instanceof'实际上是一个运算符，就像+或-，我相信它有自己的JVM字节码指令。应该够快了。

我不应该说，如果你有一个开关，你正在测试一个对象是否是某个子类的实例，那么你的设计可能需要重做。考虑将特定于子类的行为下推到子类本身。

一般来说，在这种情况下(instanceof检查这个基类的子类)不支持使用“instanceof”操作符的原因是，您应该做的是将操作移动到一个方法中，并为适当的子类重写它。例如，如果你有:

if (o instanceof Class1)
   doThis();
else if (o instanceof Class2)
   doThat();
//...

你可以用

o.doEverything();

然后在Class1中调用“doEverything()”的实现，在Class2中调用“doThat()”，以此类推。

我有同样的问题，但因为我没有找到类似于我的用例的“性能指标”，我做了一些更多的示例代码。在我的硬件和Java 6和7上，instanceof和switch在1000万次迭代上的区别是

for 10 child classes - instanceof: 1200ms vs switch: 470ms
for 5 child classes  - instanceof:  375ms vs switch: 204ms

因此，instanceof确实比较慢，特别是在大量的if-else-if语句上，但是在实际应用中差异可以忽略不计。

import java.util.Date;

public class InstanceOfVsEnum {

    public static int c1, c2, c3, c4, c5, c6, c7, c8, c9, cA;

    public static class Handler {
        public enum Type { Type1, Type2, Type3, Type4, Type5, Type6, Type7, Type8, Type9, TypeA }
        protected Handler(Type type) { this.type = type; }
        public final Type type;

        public static void addHandlerInstanceOf(Handler h) {
            if( h instanceof H1) { c1++; }
            else if( h instanceof H2) { c2++; }
            else if( h instanceof H3) { c3++; }
            else if( h instanceof H4) { c4++; }
            else if( h instanceof H5) { c5++; }
            else if( h instanceof H6) { c6++; }
            else if( h instanceof H7) { c7++; }
            else if( h instanceof H8) { c8++; }
            else if( h instanceof H9) { c9++; }
            else if( h instanceof HA) { cA++; }
        }

        public static void addHandlerSwitch(Handler h) {
            switch( h.type ) {
                case Type1: c1++; break;
                case Type2: c2++; break;
                case Type3: c3++; break;
                case Type4: c4++; break;
                case Type5: c5++; break;
                case Type6: c6++; break;
                case Type7: c7++; break;
                case Type8: c8++; break;
                case Type9: c9++; break;
                case TypeA: cA++; break;
            }
        }
    }

    public static class H1 extends Handler { public H1() { super(Type.Type1); } }
    public static class H2 extends Handler { public H2() { super(Type.Type2); } }
    public static class H3 extends Handler { public H3() { super(Type.Type3); } }
    public static class H4 extends Handler { public H4() { super(Type.Type4); } }
    public static class H5 extends Handler { public H5() { super(Type.Type5); } }
    public static class H6 extends Handler { public H6() { super(Type.Type6); } }
    public static class H7 extends Handler { public H7() { super(Type.Type7); } }
    public static class H8 extends Handler { public H8() { super(Type.Type8); } }
    public static class H9 extends Handler { public H9() { super(Type.Type9); } }
    public static class HA extends Handler { public HA() { super(Type.TypeA); } }

    final static int cCycles = 10000000;

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        H1 h1 = new H1();
        H2 h2 = new H2();
        H3 h3 = new H3();
        H4 h4 = new H4();
        H5 h5 = new H5();
        H6 h6 = new H6();
        H7 h7 = new H7();
        H8 h8 = new H8();
        H9 h9 = new H9();
        HA hA = new HA();

        Date dtStart = new Date();
        for( int i = 0; i < cCycles; i++ ) {
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h1);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h2);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h3);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h4);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h5);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h6);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h7);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h8);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(h9);
            Handler.addHandlerInstanceOf(hA);
        }
        System.out.println("Instance of - " + (new Date().getTime() - dtStart.getTime()));

        dtStart = new Date();
        for( int i = 0; i < cCycles; i++ ) {
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h1);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h2);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h3);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h4);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h5);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h6);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h7);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h8);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(h9);
            Handler.addHandlerSwitch(hA);
        }
        System.out.println("Switch of - " + (new Date().getTime() - dtStart.getTime()));
    }
}

You're focusing on the wrong thing. The difference between instanceof and any other method for checking the same thing would probably not even be measurable. If performance is critical then Java is probably the wrong language. The major reason being that you can't control when the VM decides it wants to go collect garbage, which can take the CPU to 100% for several seconds in a large program (MagicDraw 10 was great for that). Unless you are in control of every computer this program will run on you can't guarantee which version of JVM it will be on, and many of the older ones had major speed issues. If it's a small app you may be ok with Java, but if you are constantly reading and discarding data then you will notice when the GC kicks in.