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.

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.

1. for(Object o: objectArrayList){
    o.DoSomthing();
}
and

2. for(int i=0; i<objectArrayList.size(); i++){
    objectArrayList.get(i).DoSomthing();
}

两者都做同样的事情，但为了方便和安全的编程使用，在第二种使用方式中有容易出错的可能性。

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。

Accepted answer回答了这个问题，除了ArrayList…

因为大多数开发人员都依赖于ArrayList(至少我是这么认为的)

所以我有义务在这里加上正确答案。

直接从开发人员文档:-

增强的for循环(有时也称为“for-each”循环)可用于实现Iterable接口的集合和数组。对于集合，会分配一个迭代器来对hasNext()和next()进行接口调用。使用ArrayList，手工编写的计数循环大约快3倍(有或没有JIT)，但对于其他集合，增强的for循环语法将完全等同于显式迭代器的使用。

有几种迭代数组的方法:

static class Foo {
    int mSplat;
}

Foo[] mArray = ...

public void zero() {
    int sum = 0;
    for (int i = 0; i < mArray.length; ++i) {
        sum += mArray[i].mSplat;
    }
}

public void one() {
    int sum = 0;
    Foo[] localArray = mArray;
    int len = localArray.length;

    for (int i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
        sum += localArray[i].mSplat;
    }
}

public void two() {
    int sum = 0;
    for (Foo a : mArray) {
        sum += a.mSplat;
    }
}

zero()是最慢的，因为JIT还不能优化掉每次循环迭代获取数组长度的成本。

一个()比较快。它将所有内容提取到局部变量中，避免了查找。只有数组长度能带来性能上的好处。

two()对于没有JIT的设备来说是最快的，对于有JIT的设备来说与one()是没有区别的。它使用Java编程语言1.5版中引入的增强for循环语法。

因此，默认情况下您应该使用增强的for循环，但是可以考虑使用手写的计数循环来进行性能关键的ArrayList迭代。