给定下面的2个toString()实现,哪个是首选的:
public String toString(){
return "{a:"+ a + ", b:" + b + ", c: " + c +"}";
}
or
public String toString(){
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(100);
return sb.append("{a:").append(a)
.append(", b:").append(b)
.append(", c:").append(c)
.append("}")
.toString();
}
?
更重要的是,鉴于我们只有3个属性,它可能不会有什么不同,但在什么时候你会从+ concat切换到StringBuilder?
使用最新版本的Java(1.8)的反汇编(javap -c)显示了编译器引入的优化。+以及sb.append()将生成非常相似的代码。然而,如果我们在for循环中使用+,检查行为将是值得的。
在for循环中使用+添加字符串
Java:
public String myCatPlus(String[] vals) {
String result = "";
for (String val : vals) {
result = result + val;
}
return result;
}
ByteCode:(用于循环摘录)
12: iload 5
14: iload 4
16: if_icmpge 51
19: aload_3
20: iload 5
22: aaload
23: astore 6
25: new #3 // class java/lang/StringBuilder
28: dup
29: invokespecial #4 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder."<init>":()V
32: aload_2
33: invokevirtual #5 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
36: aload 6
38: invokevirtual #5 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
41: invokevirtual #6 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.toString:()Ljava/lang/String;
44: astore_2
45: iinc 5, 1
48: goto 12
使用stringbuilder.append添加字符串
Java:
public String myCatSb(String[] vals) {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
for(String val : vals) {
sb.append(val);
}
return sb.toString();
}
ByteCdoe:(循环摘录)
17: iload 5
19: iload 4
21: if_icmpge 43
24: aload_3
25: iload 5
27: aaload
28: astore 6
30: aload_2
31: aload 6
33: invokevirtual #5 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
36: pop
37: iinc 5, 1
40: goto 17
43: aload_2
不过,两者还是有一些明显的区别。在第一种情况下,使用了+,为每次for循环迭代创建新的StringBuilder,并通过执行toString()调用存储生成的结果(29到41)。所以当你在for循环中使用+运算符时,你会生成你真正不需要的中间字符串。
在大多数情况下,你不会看到这两种方法之间的实际区别,但很容易构建一个像下面这样的最坏情况:
public class Main
{
public static void main(String[] args)
{
long now = System.currentTimeMillis();
slow();
System.out.println("slow elapsed " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - now) + " ms");
now = System.currentTimeMillis();
fast();
System.out.println("fast elapsed " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - now) + " ms");
}
private static void fast()
{
StringBuilder s = new StringBuilder();
for(int i=0;i<100000;i++)
s.append("*");
}
private static void slow()
{
String s = "";
for(int i=0;i<100000;i++)
s+="*";
}
}
输出结果为:
slow elapsed 11741 ms
fast elapsed 7 ms
问题是,+=追加到一个字符串重构一个新的字符串,所以它的代价是字符串长度的线性(两者的和)。
对于你的问题
第二种方法更快,但可读性较差,也更难维护。
正如我所说,在你的具体情况下,你可能看不到区别。
这取决于字符串的大小。
请看下面的例子:
static final int MAX_ITERATIONS = 50000;
static final int CALC_AVG_EVERY = 10000;
public static void main(String[] args) {
printBytecodeVersion();
printJavaVersion();
case1();//str.concat
case2();//+=
case3();//StringBuilder
}
static void case1() {
System.out.println("[str1.concat(str2)]");
List<Long> savedTimes = new ArrayList();
long startTimeAll = System.currentTimeMillis();
String str = "";
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_ITERATIONS; i++) {
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
str = str.concat(UUID.randomUUID() + "---");
saveTime(savedTimes, startTime);
}
System.out.println("Created string of length:" + str.length() + " in " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTimeAll) + " ms");
}
static void case2() {
System.out.println("[str1+=str2]");
List<Long> savedTimes = new ArrayList();
long startTimeAll = System.currentTimeMillis();
String str = "";
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_ITERATIONS; i++) {
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
str += UUID.randomUUID() + "---";
saveTime(savedTimes, startTime);
}
System.out.println("Created string of length:" + str.length() + " in " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTimeAll) + " ms");
}
static void case3() {
System.out.println("[str1.append(str2)]");
List<Long> savedTimes = new ArrayList();
long startTimeAll = System.currentTimeMillis();
StringBuilder str = new StringBuilder("");
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_ITERATIONS; i++) {
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
str.append(UUID.randomUUID() + "---");
saveTime(savedTimes, startTime);
}
System.out.println("Created string of length:" + str.length() + " in " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - startTimeAll) + " ms");
}
static void saveTime(List<Long> executionTimes, long startTime) {
executionTimes.add(System.currentTimeMillis() - startTime);
if (executionTimes.size() % CALC_AVG_EVERY == 0) {
out.println("average time for " + executionTimes.size() + " concatenations: "
+ NumberFormat.getInstance().format(executionTimes.stream().mapToLong(Long::longValue).average().orElseGet(() -> 0))
+ " ms avg");
executionTimes.clear();
}
}
输出:
java bytecode version:8
java.version: 1.8.0_144
[str1.concat(str2)]
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.096 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.185 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.327 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.501 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.656 ms avg
Created string of length:1950000 in 17745 ms
[str1+=str2]
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.21 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.652 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 1.129 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 1.727 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 2.302 ms avg
Created string of length:1950000 in 60279 ms
[str1.append(str2)]
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.002 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.002 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.002 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.002 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.002 ms avg
Created string of length:1950000 in 100 ms
随着字符串长度的增加,+=和.concat的连接时间也会增加,后者效率更高,但仍然是非常量
这就是绝对需要StringBuilder的地方。
附注:我不认为什么时候在Java中使用StringBuilder是一个真正的复制。
这个问题讨论的是toString(),它在大多数情况下不会执行大字符串的连接。
2019年更新
自java8时代以来,情况发生了一些变化。现在看来(java13), +=的连接时间实际上与str.concat()相同。但是StringBuilder的连接时间仍然是固定的。(上面的原始帖子略有编辑,添加了更多详细的输出)
java bytecode version:13
java.version: 13.0.1
[str1.concat(str2)]
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.047 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.1 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.17 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.255 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.336 ms avg
Created string of length:1950000 in 9147 ms
[str1+=str2]
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.037 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.097 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.249 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.298 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.326 ms avg
Created string of length:1950000 in 10191 ms
[str1.append(str2)]
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.001 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.001 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.001 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.001 ms avg
average time for 10000 concatenations: 0.001 ms avg
Created string of length:1950000 in 43 ms
值得注意的还有bytecode:8/java。与bytecode:8/java.version:8相比,Version:13组合具有良好的性能优势
关键在于你是在一个地方写一个连接,还是在一段时间内把它积累起来。
对于您给出的示例,显式使用StringBuilder是没有意义的。(请查看第一个案例的编译代码。)
但是如果你正在构建一个字符串,例如在一个循环中,使用StringBuilder。
为了澄清,假设hugeArray包含数千个字符串,代码如下:
...
String result = "";
for (String s : hugeArray) {
result = result + s;
}
与以下相比非常浪费时间和内存:
...
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
for (String s : hugeArray) {
sb.append(s);
}
String result = sb.toString();
Apache Commons-Lang有一个超级容易使用的ToStringBuilder类。它在处理附加逻辑以及格式化你想要的toString外观方面做得很好。
public void toString() {
ToStringBuilder tsb = new ToStringBuilder(this);
tsb.append("a", a);
tsb.append("b", b)
return tsb.toString();
}
将返回类似com.blah的输出。YourClass@abc1321f (a =, = foo)。
或者使用链接的更浓缩的形式:
public void toString() {
return new ToStringBuilder(this).append("a", a).append("b", b").toString();
}
或者如果你想使用反射来包含类的每个字段:
public String toString() {
return ToStringBuilder.reflectionToString(this);
}
如果需要,还可以自定义ToString的样式。