为什么下面的工作正常?
String str;
while (condition) {
str = calculateStr();
.....
}
但是下面这个被认为是危险的/不正确的:
while (condition) {
String str = calculateStr();
.....
}
有必要在循环之外声明变量吗?
为什么下面的工作正常?
String str;
while (condition) {
str = calculateStr();
.....
}
但是下面这个被认为是危险的/不正确的:
while (condition) {
String str = calculateStr();
.....
}
有必要在循环之外声明变量吗?
当前回答
在最小范围内声明对象可以提高可读性。
性能对于今天的编译器来说并不重要。(在此场景中) 从维护的角度来看,第二种选择更好。 在同一个地方声明和初始化变量,在尽可能窄的范围内。
正如Donald Ervin Knuth所说:
“我们应该忘记小的效率,大约97%的时候: 过早的优化是万恶之源”
例如,程序员让性能考虑影响一段代码的设计的情况。这可能导致设计不那么清晰,或者代码不正确,因为优化使代码变得复杂,而程序员被优化分散了注意力。
其他回答
在这个问题上对几乎所有人的警告:下面是示例代码,在我的Java 7计算机上,循环内部的速度很容易慢200倍(内存消耗也略有不同)。但这不仅关乎范围,还关乎分配。
public class Test
{
private final static int STUFF_SIZE = 512;
private final static long LOOP = 10000000l;
private static class Foo
{
private long[] bigStuff = new long[STUFF_SIZE];
public Foo(long value)
{
setValue(value);
}
public void setValue(long value)
{
// Putting value in a random place.
bigStuff[(int) (value % STUFF_SIZE)] = value;
}
public long getValue()
{
// Retrieving whatever value.
return bigStuff[STUFF_SIZE / 2];
}
}
public static long test1()
{
long total = 0;
for (long i = 0; i < LOOP; i++)
{
Foo foo = new Foo(i);
total += foo.getValue();
}
return total;
}
public static long test2()
{
long total = 0;
Foo foo = new Foo(0);
for (long i = 0; i < LOOP; i++)
{
foo.setValue(i);
total += foo.getValue();
}
return total;
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
long start;
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
test1();
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() - start);
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
test2();
System.out.println(System.currentTimeMillis() - start);
}
}
结论:根据局部变量的大小,即使变量不是那么大,差异也可能是巨大的。
只是说,有时候,在循环外或循环内确实很重要。
局部变量的作用域应该总是尽可能的小。
在你的例子中,我假设str没有在while循环之外使用,否则你就不会问这个问题,因为在while循环内部声明它不是一个选项,因为它不会编译。
因此,由于str不在循环之外使用,因此str的最小作用域是在while循环内。
因此,答案强调str绝对应该在while循环中声明。没有如果,没有并且,没有但是。
The only case where this rule might be violated is if for some reason it is of vital importance that every clock cycle must be squeezed out of the code, in which case you might want to consider instantiating something in an outer scope and reusing it instead of re-instantiating it on every iteration of an inner scope. However, this does not apply to your example, due to the immutability of strings in java: a new instance of str will always be created in the beginning of your loop and it will have to be thrown away at the end of it, so there is no possibility to optimize there.
编辑:(在答案下面注入我的评论)
In any case, the right way to do things is to write all your code properly, establish a performance requirement for your product, measure your final product against this requirement, and if it does not satisfy it, then go optimize things. And what usually ends up happening is that you find ways to provide some nice and formal algorithmic optimizations in just a couple of places which make our program meet its performance requirements instead of having to go all over your entire code base and tweak and hack things in order to squeeze clock cycles here and there.
在最小范围内声明对象可以提高可读性。
性能对于今天的编译器来说并不重要。(在此场景中) 从维护的角度来看,第二种选择更好。 在同一个地方声明和初始化变量,在尽可能窄的范围内。
正如Donald Ervin Knuth所说:
“我们应该忘记小的效率,大约97%的时候: 过早的优化是万恶之源”
例如,程序员让性能考虑影响一段代码的设计的情况。这可能导致设计不那么清晰,或者代码不正确,因为优化使代码变得复杂,而程序员被优化分散了注意力。
请跳到最新的答案…
对于那些关心绩效的人,可以去掉系统。输出并将循环限制为1字节。使用double (test 1/2)和使用String(3/4),在Windows 7 Professional 64位和JDK-1.7.0_21上运行的时间以毫秒为单位,如下所示。字节码(下面也给出了test1和test2的字节码)是不同的。我懒得测试可变和相对复杂的对象。
双
Test1耗时:2710毫秒
Test2耗时:2790毫秒
字符串(在测试中用字符串替换double)
Test3耗时:1200毫秒
Test4耗时:3000毫秒
编译和获取字节码
javac.exe LocalTest1.java
javap.exe -c LocalTest1 > LocalTest1.bc
public class LocalTest1 {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
double test;
for (double i = 0; i < 1000000000; i++) {
test = i;
}
long finish = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Test1 Took: " + (finish - start) + " msecs");
}
}
public class LocalTest2 {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (double i = 0; i < 1000000000; i++) {
double test = i;
}
long finish = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Test1 Took: " + (finish - start) + " msecs");
}
}
Compiled from "LocalTest1.java"
public class LocalTest1 {
public LocalTest1();
Code:
0: aload_0
1: invokespecial #1 // Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
4: return
public static void main(java.lang.String[]) throws java.lang.Exception;
Code:
0: invokestatic #2 // Method java/lang/System.currentTimeMillis:()J
3: lstore_1
4: dconst_0
5: dstore 5
7: dload 5
9: ldc2_w #3 // double 1.0E9d
12: dcmpg
13: ifge 28
16: dload 5
18: dstore_3
19: dload 5
21: dconst_1
22: dadd
23: dstore 5
25: goto 7
28: invokestatic #2 // Method java/lang/System.currentTimeMillis:()J
31: lstore 5
33: getstatic #5 // Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
36: new #6 // class java/lang/StringBuilder
39: dup
40: invokespecial #7 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder."<init>":()V
43: ldc #8 // String Test1 Took:
45: invokevirtual #9 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
48: lload 5
50: lload_1
51: lsub
52: invokevirtual #10 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(J)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
55: ldc #11 // String msecs
57: invokevirtual #9 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
60: invokevirtual #12 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.toString:()Ljava/lang/String;
63: invokevirtual #13 // Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/String;)V
66: return
}
Compiled from "LocalTest2.java"
public class LocalTest2 {
public LocalTest2();
Code:
0: aload_0
1: invokespecial #1 // Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
4: return
public static void main(java.lang.String[]) throws java.lang.Exception;
Code:
0: invokestatic #2 // Method java/lang/System.currentTimeMillis:()J
3: lstore_1
4: dconst_0
5: dstore_3
6: dload_3
7: ldc2_w #3 // double 1.0E9d
10: dcmpg
11: ifge 24
14: dload_3
15: dstore 5
17: dload_3
18: dconst_1
19: dadd
20: dstore_3
21: goto 6
24: invokestatic #2 // Method java/lang/System.currentTimeMillis:()J
27: lstore_3
28: getstatic #5 // Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
31: new #6 // class java/lang/StringBuilder
34: dup
35: invokespecial #7 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder."<init>":()V
38: ldc #8 // String Test1 Took:
40: invokevirtual #9 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
43: lload_3
44: lload_1
45: lsub
46: invokevirtual #10 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(J)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
49: ldc #11 // String msecs
51: invokevirtual #9 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.append:(Ljava/lang/String;)Ljava/lang/StringBuilder;
54: invokevirtual #12 // Method java/lang/StringBuilder.toString:()Ljava/lang/String;
57: invokevirtual #13 // Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/String;)V
60: return
}
更新后的答案
比较所有JVM优化的性能确实不容易。然而,这在某种程度上是可能的。在谷歌卡尺中更好的测试和详细的结果
关于博客的一些细节:应该在循环内部还是循环之前声明变量? GitHub存储库:https://github.com/gunduru/jvdt 双case和100M循环的测试结果(是的所有JVM细节):https://microbenchmarks.appspot.com/runs/b1cef8d1-0e2c-4120-be61-a99faff625b4
声明前1759.209 ns DeclaredInside 2,242.308 ns
双重声明的部分测试代码
这与上面的代码并不相同。如果您只是编写了一个虚拟循环,JVM将跳过它,因此至少您需要赋值并返回一些东西。在Caliper文档中也推荐这样做。
@Param int size; // Set automatically by framework, provided in the Main
/**
* Variable is declared inside the loop.
*
* @param reps
* @return
*/
public double timeDeclaredInside(int reps) {
/* Dummy variable needed to workaround smart JVM */
double dummy = 0;
/* Test loop */
for (double i = 0; i <= size; i++) {
/* Declaration and assignment */
double test = i;
/* Dummy assignment to fake JVM */
if(i == size) {
dummy = test;
}
}
return dummy;
}
/**
* Variable is declared before the loop.
*
* @param reps
* @return
*/
public double timeDeclaredBefore(int reps) {
/* Dummy variable needed to workaround smart JVM */
double dummy = 0;
/* Actual test variable */
double test = 0;
/* Test loop */
for (double i = 0; i <= size; i++) {
/* Assignment */
test = i;
/* Not actually needed here, but we need consistent performance results */
if(i == size) {
dummy = test;
}
}
return dummy;
}
总结:declardbefore表示更好的性能——非常小——它违背了最小作用域原则。JVM实际上应该为您做这件事
在while循环之外声明String str允许它在while循环内外被引用。在while循环中声明String str只允许它在while循环中被引用。