唯一确定的方法是对其进行基准测试，甚至这也不像听起来那么简单。JIT编译器可以对代码做一些意想不到的事情。

通过变量名称objectArrayList，我假设它是java.util.ArrayList的一个实例。在这种情况下，性能差异是不明显的。

另一方面，如果它是java.util的实例。LinkedList，第二种方法会慢得多，因为list# get(int)是一个O(n)操作。

因此，第一种方法总是首选的，除非循环中的逻辑需要索引。

以下是Android开发团队对两者差异的简要分析:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZOf3pOAM6A

The result is that there is a difference, and in very restrained environments with very large lists it could be a noticeable difference. In their testing, the for each loop took twice as long. However, their testing was over an arraylist of 400,000 integers. The actual difference per element in the array was 6 microseconds. I haven't tested and they didn't say, but I would expect the difference to be slightly larger using objects rather than primitives, but even still unless you are building library code where you have no idea the scale of what you will be asked to iterate over, I think the difference is not worth stressing about.

使用迭代器总是比使用索引更好。这是因为iterator最有可能针对List实现进行了优化，而索引(调用get)可能没有。例如，LinkedList是一个List，但是通过它的元素建立索引将比使用迭代器迭代慢。

摘自Joshua Bloch的《Effective Java》第46条:

The for-each loop, introduced in release 1.5, gets rid of the clutter and the opportunity for error by hiding the iterator or index variable completely. The resulting idiom applies equally to collections and arrays: // The preferred idiom for iterating over collections and arrays for (Element e : elements) { doSomething(e); } When you see the colon (:), read it as “in.” Thus, the loop above reads as “for each element e in elements.” Note that there is no performance penalty for using the for-each loop, even for arrays. In fact, it may offer a slight performance advantage over an ordinary for loop in some circumstances, as it computes the limit of the array index only once. While you can do this by hand (Item 45), programmers don’t always do so.

即使使用像ArrayList或Vector这样的东西，其中“get”是一个简单的数组查找，第二个循环仍然有第一个循环没有的额外开销。我预计它会比第一次慢一点。