Code
2024-07-27 08:00:02

为什么Java在连续整数上的切换与添加的情况下运行得更快?

我正在研究一些需要高度优化的Java代码，因为它将在我的主程序逻辑中的许多点调用的热函数中运行。这段代码的一部分涉及到双变量乘以10的任意非负整数指数。一种快速的方法(编辑:但不是最快的，请参阅下面的更新2)来获得相乘的值是打开指数:

double multiplyByPowerOfTen(final double d, final int exponent) {
   switch (exponent) {
      case 0:
         return d;
      case 1:
         return d*10;
      case 2:
         return d*100;
      // ... same pattern
      case 9:
         return d*1000000000;
      case 10:
         return d*10000000000L;
      // ... same pattern with long literals
      case 18:
         return d*1000000000000000000L;
      default:
         throw new ParseException("Unhandled power of ten " + power, 0);
   }
}

The commented ellipses above indicate that the case int constants continue incrementing by 1, so there are really 19 cases in the above code snippet. Since I wasn't sure whether I would actually need all the powers of 10 in case statements 10 thru 18, I ran some microbenchmarks comparing the time to complete 10 million operations with this switch statement versus a switch with only cases 0 thru 9 (with the exponent limited to 9 or less to avoid breaking the pared-down switch). I got the rather surprising (to me, at least!) result that the longer switch with more case statements actually ran faster.

On a lark, I tried adding even more cases which just returned dummy values, and found that I could get the switch to run even faster with around 22-27 declared cases (even though those dummy cases are never actually hit while the code is running). (Again, cases were added in a contiguous fashion by incrementing the prior case constant by 1.) These execution time differences are not very significant: for a random exponent between 0 and 10, the dummy padded switch statement finishes 10 million executions in 1.49 secs versus 1.54 secs for the unpadded version, for a grand total savings of 5ns per execution. So, not the kind of thing that makes obsessing over padding out a switch statement worth the effort from an optimization standpoint. But I still just find it curious and counter-intuitive that a switch doesn't become slower (or perhaps at best maintain constant O(1) time) to execute as more cases are added to it.

These are the results I obtained from running with various limits on the randomly-generated exponent values. I didn't include the results all the way down to 1 for the exponent limit, but the general shape of the curve remains the same, with a ridge around the 12-17 case mark, and a valley between 18-28. All tests were run in JUnitBenchmarks using shared containers for the random values to ensure identical testing inputs. I also ran the tests both in order from longest switch statement to shortest, and vice-versa, to try and eliminate the possibility of ordering-related test problems. I've put my testing code up on a github repo if anyone wants to try to reproduce these results.

那么，这里发生了什么?我的架构或微基准构建的一些古怪之处?或者，Java在18到28个大小写范围内的执行速度真的比从11到17个大小写范围内的执行速度快一些?

Github测试回购“开关实验”

更新:我清理了相当多的基准测试库，并在/results中添加了一个文本文件，其中包含一些在更大范围内可能的指数值的输出。我还在测试代码中添加了一个不从默认抛出异常的选项，但这似乎不会影响结果。

UPDATE 2: Found some pretty good discussion of this issue from back in 2009 on the xkcd forum here: http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33524. The OP's discussion of using Array.binarySearch() gave me the idea for a simple array-based implementation of the exponentiation pattern above. There's no need for the binary search since I know what the entries in the array are. It appears to run about 3 times faster than using switch, obviously at the expense of some of the control flow that switch affords. That code has been added to the github repo also.

当前回答

开关情况是更快，如果情况值被放置在一个狭窄的范围。

case 1:
case 2:
case 3:
..
..
case n:

Because, in this case the compiler can avoid performing a comparison for every case leg in the switch statement. The compiler make a jump table which contains addresses of the actions to be taken on different legs. The value on which the switch is being performed is manipulated to convert it into an index in to the jump table. In this implementation , the time taken in the switch statement is much less than the time taken in an equivalent if-else-if statement cascade. Also the time taken in the switch statement is independent of the number of case legs in the switch statement.

正如维基百科中关于switch语句的编译部分所述。

如果输入值的范围可识别为“小”，并且只有一个 很少有差距，一些编译器合并了一个优化器可能实际上 的分支表或数组实现switch语句 索引函数指针，而不是一长串的条件 指令。这允许switch语句立即进行判断 执行什么分支，而不必通过列表 比较。

2013-03-25 17:34:32

其他回答

答案就在字节码中:

SwitchTest10.java

public class SwitchTest10 {

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        int n = 0;

        switcher(n);
    }

    public static void switcher(int n) {
        switch(n) {
            case 0: System.out.println(0);
                    break;

            case 1: System.out.println(1);
                    break;

            case 2: System.out.println(2);
                    break;

            case 3: System.out.println(3);
                    break;

            case 4: System.out.println(4);
                    break;

            case 5: System.out.println(5);
                    break;

            case 6: System.out.println(6);
                    break;

            case 7: System.out.println(7);
                    break;

            case 8: System.out.println(8);
                    break;

            case 9: System.out.println(9);
                    break;

            case 10: System.out.println(10);
                    break;

            default: System.out.println("test");
        }
    }       
}

对应的字节码;只显示相关部分:

public static void switcher(int);
  Code:
   0:   iload_0
   1:   tableswitch{ //0 to 10
        0: 60;
        1: 70;
        2: 80;
        3: 90;
        4: 100;
        5: 110;
        6: 120;
        7: 131;
        8: 142;
        9: 153;
        10: 164;
        default: 175 }

SwitchTest22.java:

public class SwitchTest22 {

    public static void main(String[] args) {
        int n = 0;

        switcher(n);
    }

    public static void switcher(int n) {
        switch(n) {
            case 0: System.out.println(0);
                    break;

            case 1: System.out.println(1);
                    break;

            case 2: System.out.println(2);
                    break;

            case 3: System.out.println(3);
                    break;

            case 4: System.out.println(4);
                    break;

            case 5: System.out.println(5);
                    break;

            case 6: System.out.println(6);
                    break;

            case 7: System.out.println(7);
                    break;

            case 8: System.out.println(8);
                    break;

            case 9: System.out.println(9);
                    break;

            case 100: System.out.println(10);
                    break;

            case 110: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 120: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 130: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 140: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 150: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 160: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 170: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 180: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 190: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 200: System.out.println(10);
                    break;
            case 210: System.out.println(10);
                    break;

            case 220: System.out.println(10);
                    break;

            default: System.out.println("test");
        }
    }       
}

对应的字节码;同样，只显示相关部分:

public static void switcher(int);
  Code:
   0:   iload_0
   1:   lookupswitch{ //23
        0: 196;
        1: 206;
        2: 216;
        3: 226;
        4: 236;
        5: 246;
        6: 256;
        7: 267;
        8: 278;
        9: 289;
        100: 300;
        110: 311;
        120: 322;
        130: 333;
        140: 344;
        150: 355;
        160: 366;
        170: 377;
        180: 388;
        190: 399;
        200: 410;
        210: 421;
        220: 432;
        default: 443 }

在第一种情况下，使用较窄的范围，编译的字节码使用一个表witch。在第二种情况下，编译的字节码使用查找开关。

在tableswitch中，堆栈顶部的整数值用于索引到表中，以查找分支/跳转目标。然后立即执行这个跳转/分支。因此，这是一个O(1)操作。

A lookupswitch is more complicated. In this case, the integer value needs to be compared against all the keys in the table until the correct key is found. After the key is found, the branch/jump target (that this key is mapped to) is used for the jump. The table that is used in lookupswitch is sorted and a binary-search algorithm can be used to find the correct key. Performance for a binary search is O(log n), and the entire process is also O(log n), because the jump is still O(1). So the reason the performance is lower in the case of sparse ranges is that the correct key must first be looked up because you cannot index into the table directly.

如果有稀疏值，并且您只有一个表witch可以使用，那么表实际上会包含指向默认选项的虚拟条目。例如，假设SwitchTest10.java中的最后一个条目是21而不是10，你会得到:

public static void switcher(int);
  Code:
   0:   iload_0
   1:   tableswitch{ //0 to 21
        0: 104;
        1: 114;
        2: 124;
        3: 134;
        4: 144;
        5: 154;
        6: 164;
        7: 175;
        8: 186;
        9: 197;
        10: 219;
        11: 219;
        12: 219;
        13: 219;
        14: 219;
        15: 219;
        16: 219;
        17: 219;
        18: 219;
        19: 219;
        20: 219;
        21: 208;
        default: 219 }

因此，编译器基本上创建了这个巨大的表，其中包含空白之间的虚拟条目，指向默认指令的分支目标。即使没有默认值，它也会包含指向开关块后面指令的条目。我做了一些基本的测试，我发现如果最后一个索引和前一个索引(9)之间的差距大于35，它使用查找开关而不是表开关。

switch语句的行为在Java虚拟机规范(§3.10)中定义:

Where the cases of the switch are sparse, the table representation of the tableswitch instruction becomes inefficient in terms of space. The lookupswitch instruction may be used instead. The lookupswitch instruction pairs int keys (the values of the case labels) with target offsets in a table. When a lookupswitch instruction is executed, the value of the expression of the switch is compared against the keys in the table. If one of the keys matches the value of the expression, execution continues at the associated target offset. If no key matches, execution continues at the default target. [...]

2013-03-25 18:14:55

正如另一个答案所指出的，因为case值是连续的(而不是稀疏的)，为各种测试生成的字节码使用一个切换表(字节码指令表)。

然而，一旦JIT启动它的工作并将字节码编译为程序集，表开关指令并不总是产生指针数组:有时开关表被转换为看起来像查找开关的东西(类似于if/else if结构)。

反编译JIT生成的程序集(热点JDK 1.7)表明，当有17个或更少的情况时，它使用一系列if/else if，当有18个以上的情况时(更有效)使用一个指针数组。

使用18这个神奇数字的原因似乎归结于MinJumpTableSize JVM标志的默认值(代码中的第352行左右)。

我在热点编译器列表上提出了这个问题，这似乎是过去测试的遗留问题。注意，在JDK 8中执行了更多的基准测试后，这个默认值已经被删除了。

最后，当方法变得太长时(在我的测试中有25例>)，它就不再与默认的JVM设置内联了——这是此时性能下降的最可能原因。

5种情况下，反编译的代码看起来像这样(注意cmp/je/jg/jmp指令，if/goto的程序集):

[Verified Entry Point]
  # {method} 'multiplyByPowerOfTen' '(DI)D' in 'javaapplication4/Test1'
  # parm0:    xmm0:xmm0   = double
  # parm1:    rdx       = int
  #           [sp+0x20]  (sp of caller)
  0x00000000024f0160: mov    DWORD PTR [rsp-0x6000],eax
                                                ;   {no_reloc}
  0x00000000024f0167: push   rbp
  0x00000000024f0168: sub    rsp,0x10           ;*synchronization entry
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@-1 (line 56)
  0x00000000024f016c: cmp    edx,0x3
  0x00000000024f016f: je     0x00000000024f01c3
  0x00000000024f0171: cmp    edx,0x3
  0x00000000024f0174: jg     0x00000000024f01a5
  0x00000000024f0176: cmp    edx,0x1
  0x00000000024f0179: je     0x00000000024f019b
  0x00000000024f017b: cmp    edx,0x1
  0x00000000024f017e: jg     0x00000000024f0191
  0x00000000024f0180: test   edx,edx
  0x00000000024f0182: je     0x00000000024f01cb
  0x00000000024f0184: mov    ebp,edx
  0x00000000024f0186: mov    edx,0x17
  0x00000000024f018b: call   0x00000000024c90a0  ; OopMap{off=48}
                                                ;*new  ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@72 (line 83)
                                                ;   {runtime_call}
  0x00000000024f0190: int3                      ;*new  ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@72 (line 83)
  0x00000000024f0191: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xffffffffffffffa7]        # 0x00000000024f0140
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@52 (line 62)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000024f0199: jmp    0x00000000024f01cb
  0x00000000024f019b: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xffffffffffffff8d]        # 0x00000000024f0130
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@46 (line 60)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000024f01a3: jmp    0x00000000024f01cb
  0x00000000024f01a5: cmp    edx,0x5
  0x00000000024f01a8: je     0x00000000024f01b9
  0x00000000024f01aa: cmp    edx,0x5
  0x00000000024f01ad: jg     0x00000000024f0184  ;*tableswitch
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@1 (line 56)
  0x00000000024f01af: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xffffffffffffff81]        # 0x00000000024f0138
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@64 (line 66)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000024f01b7: jmp    0x00000000024f01cb
  0x00000000024f01b9: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xffffffffffffff67]        # 0x00000000024f0128
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@70 (line 68)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000024f01c1: jmp    0x00000000024f01cb
  0x00000000024f01c3: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xffffffffffffff55]        # 0x00000000024f0120
                                                ;*tableswitch
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@1 (line 56)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000024f01cb: add    rsp,0x10
  0x00000000024f01cf: pop    rbp
  0x00000000024f01d0: test   DWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffdf3fe2a],eax        # 0x0000000000430000
                                                ;   {poll_return}
  0x00000000024f01d6: ret

在18种情况下，程序集看起来像这样(注意使用的指针数组，并抑制了所有比较的需要:jmp QWORD PTR [r8+r10*1]直接跳到正确的乘法)-这可能是性能改进的原因:

[Verified Entry Point]
  # {method} 'multiplyByPowerOfTen' '(DI)D' in 'javaapplication4/Test1'
  # parm0:    xmm0:xmm0   = double
  # parm1:    rdx       = int
  #           [sp+0x20]  (sp of caller)
  0x000000000287fe20: mov    DWORD PTR [rsp-0x6000],eax
                                                ;   {no_reloc}
  0x000000000287fe27: push   rbp
  0x000000000287fe28: sub    rsp,0x10           ;*synchronization entry
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@-1 (line 56)
  0x000000000287fe2c: cmp    edx,0x13
  0x000000000287fe2f: jae    0x000000000287fe46
  0x000000000287fe31: movsxd r10,edx
  0x000000000287fe34: shl    r10,0x3
  0x000000000287fe38: movabs r8,0x287fd70       ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe42: jmp    QWORD PTR [r8+r10*1]  ;*tableswitch
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@1 (line 56)
  0x000000000287fe46: mov    ebp,edx
  0x000000000287fe48: mov    edx,0x31
  0x000000000287fe4d: xchg   ax,ax
  0x000000000287fe4f: call   0x00000000028590a0  ; OopMap{off=52}
                                                ;*new  ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@202 (line 96)
                                                ;   {runtime_call}
  0x000000000287fe54: int3                      ;*new  ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@202 (line 96)
  0x000000000287fe55: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe8b]        # 0x000000000287fce8
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@194 (line 92)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe5d: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fe62: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe86]        # 0x000000000287fcf0
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@188 (line 90)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe6a: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fe6f: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe81]        # 0x000000000287fcf8
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@182 (line 88)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe77: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fe7c: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe7c]        # 0x000000000287fd00
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@176 (line 86)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe84: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fe89: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe77]        # 0x000000000287fd08
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@170 (line 84)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe91: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fe96: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe72]        # 0x000000000287fd10
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@164 (line 82)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fe9e: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fea0: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe70]        # 0x000000000287fd18
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@158 (line 80)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fea8: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287feaa: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe6e]        # 0x000000000287fd20
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@152 (line 78)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287feb2: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287feb4: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe24]        # 0x000000000287fce0
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@146 (line 76)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287febc: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287febe: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe6a]        # 0x000000000287fd30
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@140 (line 74)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fec6: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fec8: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe68]        # 0x000000000287fd38
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@134 (line 72)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fed0: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fed2: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe66]        # 0x000000000287fd40
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@128 (line 70)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287feda: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fedc: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe64]        # 0x000000000287fd48
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@122 (line 68)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fee4: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fee6: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe62]        # 0x000000000287fd50
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@116 (line 66)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287feee: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fef0: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe60]        # 0x000000000287fd58
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@110 (line 64)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287fef8: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287fefa: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe5e]        # 0x000000000287fd60
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@104 (line 62)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287ff02: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287ff04: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe5c]        # 0x000000000287fd68
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@98 (line 60)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287ff0c: jmp    0x000000000287ff16
  0x000000000287ff0e: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe12]        # 0x000000000287fd28
                                                ;*tableswitch
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@1 (line 56)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000287ff16: add    rsp,0x10
  0x000000000287ff1a: pop    rbp
  0x000000000287ff1b: test   DWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffd9b00df],eax        # 0x0000000000230000
                                                ;   {poll_return}
  0x000000000287ff21: ret

最后，带有30个case的程序集(如下)看起来与18个case相似，除了@cHao指出的出现在代码中间的额外movapd xmm0,xmm1 -然而，性能下降最可能的原因是方法太长，无法与默认的JVM设置内联:

[Verified Entry Point]
  # {method} 'multiplyByPowerOfTen' '(DI)D' in 'javaapplication4/Test1'
  # parm0:    xmm0:xmm0   = double
  # parm1:    rdx       = int
  #           [sp+0x20]  (sp of caller)
  0x0000000002524560: mov    DWORD PTR [rsp-0x6000],eax
                                                ;   {no_reloc}
  0x0000000002524567: push   rbp
  0x0000000002524568: sub    rsp,0x10           ;*synchronization entry
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@-1 (line 56)
  0x000000000252456c: movapd xmm1,xmm0
  0x0000000002524570: cmp    edx,0x1f
  0x0000000002524573: jae    0x0000000002524592  ;*tableswitch
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@1 (line 56)
  0x0000000002524575: movsxd r10,edx
  0x0000000002524578: shl    r10,0x3
  0x000000000252457c: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe3c]        # 0x00000000025243c0
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@364 (line 118)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x0000000002524584: movabs r8,0x2524450       ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000252458e: jmp    QWORD PTR [r8+r10*1]  ;*tableswitch
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@1 (line 56)
  0x0000000002524592: mov    ebp,edx
  0x0000000002524594: mov    edx,0x31
  0x0000000002524599: xchg   ax,ax
  0x000000000252459b: call   0x00000000024f90a0  ; OopMap{off=64}
                                                ;*new  ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@370 (line 120)
                                                ;   {runtime_call}
  0x00000000025245a0: int3                      ;*new  ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@370 (line 120)
  0x00000000025245a1: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe27]        # 0x00000000025243d0
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@358 (line 116)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245a9: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245ae: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe22]        # 0x00000000025243d8
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@348 (line 114)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245b6: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245bb: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe1d]        # 0x00000000025243e0
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@338 (line 112)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245c3: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245c8: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe18]        # 0x00000000025243e8
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@328 (line 110)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245d0: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245d5: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe13]        # 0x00000000025243f0
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@318 (line 108)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245dd: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245e2: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe0e]        # 0x00000000025243f8
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@308 (line 106)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245ea: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245ef: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe09]        # 0x0000000002524400
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@298 (line 104)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x00000000025245f7: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x00000000025245fc: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe04]        # 0x0000000002524408
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@288 (line 102)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x0000000002524604: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524609: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffdff]        # 0x0000000002524410
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@278 (line 100)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x0000000002524611: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524616: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffdfa]        # 0x0000000002524418
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@268 (line 98)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000252461e: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524623: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffd9d]        # 0x00000000025243c8
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@258 (line 96)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000252462b: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524630: movapd xmm0,xmm1
  0x0000000002524634: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffe0c]        # 0x0000000002524448
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@242 (line 92)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000252463c: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524641: movapd xmm0,xmm1
  0x0000000002524645: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffddb]        # 0x0000000002524428
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@236 (line 90)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000252464d: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524652: movapd xmm0,xmm1
  0x0000000002524656: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffdd2]        # 0x0000000002524430
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@230 (line 88)
                                                ;   {section_word}
  0x000000000252465e: jmp    0x0000000002524744
  0x0000000002524663: movapd xmm0,xmm1
  0x0000000002524667: mulsd  xmm0,QWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffffffdc9]        # 0x0000000002524438
                                                ;*dmul
                                                ; - javaapplication4.Test1::multiplyByPowerOfTen@224 (line 86)
                                                ;   {section_word}

[etc.]

  0x0000000002524744: add    rsp,0x10
  0x0000000002524748: pop    rbp
  0x0000000002524749: test   DWORD PTR [rip+0xfffffffffde1b8b1],eax        # 0x0000000000340000
                                                ;   {poll_return}
  0x000000000252474f: ret
2013-03-25 17:59:57

在javac源代码的基础上，你可以用它使用表witch的方式来编写switch。

我们可以使用javac源代码中的计算来计算第二个示例的成本。

lo = 0
hi = 220
nlabels = 24

table_space_cost = 4 + hi - lo + 1
table_time_cost = 3
lookup_space_cost = 3 + 2 * nlabels
lookup_time_cost = nlabels

table_cost = table_space_cost + 3 * table_time_cost // 234
lookup_cost = lookup_space_cost + 3 * lookup_time_cos // 123

这里表开关的开销(234)比查找开关的开销(123)高，因此查找开关将被选为这个switch语句的操作码。

2021-04-20 15:56:12

既然这个问题已经回答了(或多或少)，这里有一些提示。 使用

private static final double[] mul={1d, 10d...};
static double multiplyByPowerOfTen(final double d, final int exponent) {
      if (exponent<0 || exponent>=mul.length) throw new ParseException();//or just leave the IOOBE be
      return mul[exponent]*d;
}

该代码使用更少的IC(指令缓存)，并将始终内联。如果代码是热的，数组将在L1数据缓存中。查找表几乎总是一种胜利。(特别是微基准测试:D)

编辑:如果您希望方法是热内联的，请考虑像throw new ParseException()这样的非快速路径与最小值一样短，或者将它们移动到单独的静态方法(因此使它们与最小值一样短)。那就是throw new ParseException("Unhandled power of ten " + power, 0);b/c是一个很弱的想法，它消耗了大量可以解释的代码的内联预算-字符串连接在字节码中相当冗长。更多信息和一个真实的情况下w/ ArrayList

2013-03-27 21:58:52

开关情况是更快，如果情况值被放置在一个狭窄的范围。

case 1:
case 2:
case 3:
..
..
case n:

Because, in this case the compiler can avoid performing a comparison for every case leg in the switch statement. The compiler make a jump table which contains addresses of the actions to be taken on different legs. The value on which the switch is being performed is manipulated to convert it into an index in to the jump table. In this implementation , the time taken in the switch statement is much less than the time taken in an equivalent if-else-if statement cascade. Also the time taken in the switch statement is independent of the number of case legs in the switch statement.

正如维基百科中关于switch语句的编译部分所述。

如果输入值的范围可识别为“小”，并且只有一个 很少有差距，一些编译器合并了一个优化器可能实际上 的分支表或数组实现switch语句 索引函数指针，而不是一长串的条件 指令。这允许switch语句立即进行判断 执行什么分支，而不必通过列表 比较。

2013-03-25 17:34:32

推荐文章

aliyun

最新文章

标签

2024 code 京ICP备15047053号-1