我刚刚在c# 2.0中写了一个字符串反向函数(即LINQ不可用)，然后想到了这个:
public string Reverse(string text)
{
char[] cArray = text.ToCharArray();
string reverse = String.Empty;
for (int i = cArray.Length - 1; i > -1; i--)
{
reverse += cArray[i];
}
return reverse;
}
就我个人而言，我并不喜欢这个功能，我相信有更好的方法来实现它。是吗?
当前回答
Greg Beech发布了一个不安全的选项，它确实很快(这是一个原地逆转);但是，正如他在回答中指出的那样，这完全是一个灾难性的想法。
也就是说，我很惊讶有这么多的共识，Array。逆向是最快的方法。仍然有一种不安全的方法，它返回字符串的反向副本(没有原地反转的恶作剧)，比Array快得多。小字符串的反向方法:
public static unsafe string Reverse(string text)
{
int len = text.Length;
// Why allocate a char[] array on the heap when you won't use it
// outside of this method? Use the stack.
char* reversed = stackalloc char[len];
// Avoid bounds-checking performance penalties.
fixed (char* str = text)
{
int i = 0;
int j = i + len - 1;
while (i < len)
{
reversed[i++] = str[j--];
}
}
// Need to use this overload for the System.String constructor
// as providing just the char* pointer could result in garbage
// at the end of the string (no guarantee of null terminator).
return new string(reversed, 0, len);
}
以下是一些基准测试结果。
您可以看到，相对于Array，性能增益会缩小，然后消失。当字符串变大时，反向方法。然而，对于小型到中型的字符串，很难击败这种方法。
其他回答
抱歉写了这么长时间，但这可能会很有趣
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Text;
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
class Program
{
public static string ReverseUsingArrayClass(string text)
{
char[] chars = text.ToCharArray();
Array.Reverse(chars);
return new string(chars);
}
public static string ReverseUsingCharacterBuffer(string text)
{
char[] charArray = new char[text.Length];
int inputStrLength = text.Length - 1;
for (int idx = 0; idx <= inputStrLength; idx++)
{
charArray[idx] = text[inputStrLength - idx];
}
return new string(charArray);
}
public static string ReverseUsingStringBuilder(string text)
{
if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(text))
{
return text;
}
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder(text.Length);
for (int i = text.Length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
builder.Append(text[i]);
}
return builder.ToString();
}
private static string ReverseUsingStack(string input)
{
Stack<char> resultStack = new Stack<char>();
foreach (char c in input)
{
resultStack.Push(c);
}
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
while (resultStack.Count > 0)
{
sb.Append(resultStack.Pop());
}
return sb.ToString();
}
public static string ReverseUsingXOR(string text)
{
char[] charArray = text.ToCharArray();
int length = text.Length - 1;
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++, length--)
{
charArray[i] ^= charArray[length];
charArray[length] ^= charArray[i];
charArray[i] ^= charArray[length];
}
return new string(charArray);
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string testString = string.Join(";", new string[] {
new string('a', 100),
new string('b', 101),
new string('c', 102),
new string('d', 103),
});
int cycleCount = 100000;
Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < cycleCount; i++)
{
ReverseUsingCharacterBuffer(testString);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("ReverseUsingCharacterBuffer: " + stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < cycleCount; i++)
{
ReverseUsingArrayClass(testString);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("ReverseUsingArrayClass: " + stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < cycleCount; i++)
{
ReverseUsingStringBuilder(testString);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("ReverseUsingStringBuilder: " + stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < cycleCount; i++)
{
ReverseUsingStack(testString);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("ReverseUsingStack: " + stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
stopwatch.Reset();
stopwatch.Start();
for (int i = 0; i < cycleCount; i++)
{
ReverseUsingXOR(testString);
}
stopwatch.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("ReverseUsingXOR: " + stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
}
}
}
结果:
ReverseUsingCharacterBuffer: 346毫秒 ReverseUsingArrayClass: 87毫秒 ReverseUsingStringBuilder: 824毫秒 ReverseUsingStack: 2086毫秒 ReverseUsingXOR: 319毫秒
这是一个非常棘手的问题。
我推荐使用Array。大多数情况下是反向的，因为它是原生编码的，维护和理解非常简单。
在我测试的所有情况下，它似乎都优于StringBuilder。
public string Reverse(string text)
{
if (text == null) return null;
// this was posted by petebob as well
char[] array = text.ToCharArray();
Array.Reverse(array);
return new String(array);
}
对于特定长度的字符串，使用Xor的第二种方法更快。
public static string ReverseXor(string s)
{
if (s == null) return null;
char[] charArray = s.ToCharArray();
int len = s.Length - 1;
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++, len--)
{
charArray[i] ^= charArray[len];
charArray[len] ^= charArray[i];
charArray[i] ^= charArray[len];
}
return new string(charArray);
}
注意:如果你想支持完整的Unicode UTF16字符集，请阅读此。而是使用那里的实现。它可以通过使用上述算法之一进一步优化，并在反转字符后遍历字符串以清理它。
下面是StringBuilder和Array之间的性能比较。逆向和异或法。
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
using System.Diagnostics;
namespace ConsoleApplication4
{
class Program
{
delegate string StringDelegate(string s);
static void Benchmark(string description, StringDelegate d, int times, string text)
{
Stopwatch sw = new Stopwatch();
sw.Start();
for (int j = 0; j < times; j++)
{
d(text);
}
sw.Stop();
Console.WriteLine("{0} Ticks {1} : called {2} times.", sw.ElapsedTicks, description, times);
}
public static string ReverseXor(string s)
{
char[] charArray = s.ToCharArray();
int len = s.Length - 1;
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++, len--)
{
charArray[i] ^= charArray[len];
charArray[len] ^= charArray[i];
charArray[i] ^= charArray[len];
}
return new string(charArray);
}
public static string ReverseSB(string text)
{
StringBuilder builder = new StringBuilder(text.Length);
for (int i = text.Length - 1; i >= 0; i--)
{
builder.Append(text[i]);
}
return builder.ToString();
}
public static string ReverseArray(string text)
{
char[] array = text.ToCharArray();
Array.Reverse(array);
return (new string(array));
}
public static string StringOfLength(int length)
{
Random random = new Random();
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
for (int i = 0; i < length; i++)
{
sb.Append(Convert.ToChar(Convert.ToInt32(Math.Floor(26 * random.NextDouble() + 65))));
}
return sb.ToString();
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
int[] lengths = new int[] {1,10,15,25,50,75,100,1000,100000};
foreach (int l in lengths)
{
int iterations = 10000;
string text = StringOfLength(l);
Benchmark(String.Format("String Builder (Length: {0})", l), ReverseSB, iterations, text);
Benchmark(String.Format("Array.Reverse (Length: {0})", l), ReverseArray, iterations, text);
Benchmark(String.Format("Xor (Length: {0})", l), ReverseXor, iterations, text);
Console.WriteLine();
}
Console.Read();
}
}
}
以下是调查结果:
26251 Ticks String Builder (Length: 1) : called 10000 times.
33373 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 1) : called 10000 times.
20162 Ticks Xor (Length: 1) : called 10000 times.
51321 Ticks String Builder (Length: 10) : called 10000 times.
37105 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 10) : called 10000 times.
23974 Ticks Xor (Length: 10) : called 10000 times.
66570 Ticks String Builder (Length: 15) : called 10000 times.
26027 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 15) : called 10000 times.
24017 Ticks Xor (Length: 15) : called 10000 times.
101609 Ticks String Builder (Length: 25) : called 10000 times.
28472 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 25) : called 10000 times.
35355 Ticks Xor (Length: 25) : called 10000 times.
161601 Ticks String Builder (Length: 50) : called 10000 times.
35839 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 50) : called 10000 times.
51185 Ticks Xor (Length: 50) : called 10000 times.
230898 Ticks String Builder (Length: 75) : called 10000 times.
40628 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 75) : called 10000 times.
78906 Ticks Xor (Length: 75) : called 10000 times.
312017 Ticks String Builder (Length: 100) : called 10000 times.
52225 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 100) : called 10000 times.
110195 Ticks Xor (Length: 100) : called 10000 times.
2970691 Ticks String Builder (Length: 1000) : called 10000 times.
292094 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 1000) : called 10000 times.
846585 Ticks Xor (Length: 1000) : called 10000 times.
305564115 Ticks String Builder (Length: 100000) : called 10000 times.
74884495 Ticks Array.Reverse (Length: 100000) : called 10000 times.
125409674 Ticks Xor (Length: 100000) : called 10000 times.
对于短字符串，Xor似乎更快。
Greg Beech发布了一个不安全的选项，它确实很快(这是一个原地逆转);但是，正如他在回答中指出的那样，这完全是一个灾难性的想法。
也就是说，我很惊讶有这么多的共识，Array。逆向是最快的方法。仍然有一种不安全的方法，它返回字符串的反向副本(没有原地反转的恶作剧)，比Array快得多。小字符串的反向方法:
public static unsafe string Reverse(string text)
{
int len = text.Length;
// Why allocate a char[] array on the heap when you won't use it
// outside of this method? Use the stack.
char* reversed = stackalloc char[len];
// Avoid bounds-checking performance penalties.
fixed (char* str = text)
{
int i = 0;
int j = i + len - 1;
while (i < len)
{
reversed[i++] = str[j--];
}
}
// Need to use this overload for the System.String constructor
// as providing just the char* pointer could result in garbage
// at the end of the string (no guarantee of null terminator).
return new string(reversed, 0, len);
}
以下是一些基准测试结果。
您可以看到，相对于Array，性能增益会缩小，然后消失。当字符串变大时，反向方法。然而，对于小型到中型的字符串，很难击败这种方法。
public static string Reverse( string s )
{
char[] charArray = s.ToCharArray();
Array.Reverse(charArray);
return new string(charArray);
}
我在面试中也被问到类似的问题。这是我的回答，尽管它在性能上可能没有其他答案那么快。我的问题是“创建一个类，它可以有一个反向打印字符串的方法”:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
namespace BackwardsTest
{
class PrintBackwards
{
public static void print(string param)
{
if (param == null || param.Length == 0)
{
Console.WriteLine("string is null");
return;
}
List<char> list = new List<char>();
string returned = null;
foreach(char d in param)
{
list.Add(d);
}
for(int i = list.Count(); i > 0; i--)
{
returned = returned + list[list.Count - 1];
list.RemoveAt(list.Count - 1);
}
Console.WriteLine(returned);
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
string test = "I want to print backwards";
PrintBackwards.print(test);
System.Threading.Thread.Sleep(5000);
}
}
}
