+操作符是正常的连接选择，并且可能是连接字符串的最快方式。

+和<<之间的区别在于<<改变了对象的左侧，而+则不会。

irb(main):001:0> s = 'a'
=> "a"
irb(main):002:0> s + 'b'
=> "ab"
irb(main):003:0> s
=> "a"
irb(main):004:0> s << 'b'
=> "ab"
irb(main):005:0> s
=> "ab"

下面是受这个要点启发的另一个基准测试。它比较动态和预定义字符串的连接(+)、追加(<<)和插值(#{})。

require 'benchmark'

# we will need the CAPTION and FORMAT constants:
include Benchmark

count = 100_000


puts "Dynamic strings"

Benchmark.benchmark(CAPTION, 7, FORMAT) do |bm|
  bm.report("concat") { count.times { 11.to_s +  '/' +  12.to_s } }
  bm.report("append") { count.times { 11.to_s << '/' << 12.to_s } }
  bm.report("interp") { count.times { "#{11}/#{12}" } }
end


puts "\nPredefined strings"

s11 = "11"
s12 = "12"
Benchmark.benchmark(CAPTION, 7, FORMAT) do |bm|
  bm.report("concat") { count.times { s11 +  '/' +  s12 } }
  bm.report("append") { count.times { s11 << '/' << s12 } }
  bm.report("interp") { count.times { "#{s11}/#{s12}"   } }
end

输出:

Dynamic strings
              user     system      total        real
concat    0.050000   0.000000   0.050000 (  0.047770)
append    0.040000   0.000000   0.040000 (  0.042724)
interp    0.050000   0.000000   0.050000 (  0.051736)

Predefined strings
              user     system      total        real
concat    0.030000   0.000000   0.030000 (  0.024888)
append    0.020000   0.000000   0.020000 (  0.023373)
interp    3.160000   0.160000   3.320000 (  3.311253)

结论:MRI内插重。

你说的是串联?那么#concat方法呢?

a = 'foo'
a.object_id #=> some number
a.concat 'bar' #=> foobar
a.object_id #=> same as before -- string a remains the same object

公平地说，concat别名为<<。

您可以使用+或<<操作符，但在ruby中.concat函数是最可取的，因为它比其他操作符快得多。你可以用它。

source = "#{ROOT_DIR}/".concat(project.concat("/App.config"))

情况很重要，例如:

# this will not work
output = ''

Users.all.each do |user|
  output + "#{user.email}\n"
end
# the output will be ''
puts output

# this will do the job
output = ''

Users.all.each do |user|
  output << "#{user.email}\n"
end
# will get the desired output
puts output

在第一个示例中，与+操作符连接将不会更新输出对象，然而，在第二个示例中，<<操作符将在每次迭代中更新输出对象。因此，对于上述类型的情况，<<更好。

从http://greyblake.com/blog/2012/09/02/ruby-perfomance-tricks/

使用<<即concat比+=更有效，因为后者创建了一个临时对象并用新对象覆盖第一个对象。

require 'benchmark'

N = 1000
BASIC_LENGTH = 10

5.times do |factor|
  length = BASIC_LENGTH * (10 ** factor)
  puts "_" * 60 + "\nLENGTH: #{length}"

  Benchmark.bm(10, '+= VS <<') do |x|
    concat_report = x.report("+=")  do
      str1 = ""
      str2 = "s" * length
      N.times { str1 += str2 }
    end

    modify_report = x.report("<<")  do
      str1 = "s"
      str2 = "s" * length
      N.times { str1 << str2 }
    end

    [concat_report / modify_report]
  end
end

输出:

____________________________________________________________
LENGTH: 10
                 user     system      total        real
+=           0.000000   0.000000   0.000000 (  0.004671)
<<           0.000000   0.000000   0.000000 (  0.000176)
+= VS <<          NaN        NaN        NaN ( 26.508796)
____________________________________________________________
LENGTH: 100
                 user     system      total        real
+=           0.020000   0.000000   0.020000 (  0.022995)
<<           0.000000   0.000000   0.000000 (  0.000226)
+= VS <<          Inf        NaN        NaN (101.845829)
____________________________________________________________
LENGTH: 1000
                 user     system      total        real
+=           0.270000   0.120000   0.390000 (  0.390888)
<<           0.000000   0.000000   0.000000 (  0.001730)
+= VS <<          Inf        Inf        NaN (225.920077)
____________________________________________________________
LENGTH: 10000
                 user     system      total        real
+=           3.660000   1.570000   5.230000 (  5.233861)
<<           0.000000   0.010000   0.010000 (  0.015099)
+= VS <<          Inf 157.000000        NaN (346.629692)
____________________________________________________________
LENGTH: 100000
                 user     system      total        real
+=          31.270000  16.990000  48.260000 ( 48.328511)
<<           0.050000   0.050000   0.100000 (  0.105993)
+= VS <<   625.400000 339.800000        NaN (455.961373)