A widely unappreciated argument for ArrayList and against LinkedList is that LinkedLists are uncomfortable while debugging. The time spent by maintenance developers to understand the program, e.g. to find bugs, increases and IMHO does sometimes not justify the nanoseconds in performance improvements or bytes in memory consumption in enterprise applicatons. Sometimes (well, of course it depends on the type of applications), it's better to waste a few bytes but have an application which is more maintainable or easier to understand.

例如，在Java环境中，使用Eclipse调试器，调试ArrayList将显示一个非常容易理解的结构:

arrayList   ArrayList<String>
  elementData   Object[]
    [0] Object  "Foo"
    [1] Object  "Foo"
    [2] Object  "Foo"
    [3] Object  "Foo"
    [4] Object  "Foo"
    ...

另一方面，查看LinkedList的内容并找到特定的对象变成了一个展开树的噩梦，更不用说过滤LinkedList内部信息所需的认知开销:

linkedList  LinkedList<String>
    header  LinkedList$Entry<E>
        element E
        next    LinkedList$Entry<E>
            element E   "Foo"
            next    LinkedList$Entry<E>
                element E   "Foo"
                next    LinkedList$Entry<E>
                    element E   "Foo"
                    next    LinkedList$Entry<E>
                    previous    LinkedList$Entry<E>
                    ...
                previous    LinkedList$Entry<E>
            previous    LinkedList$Entry<E>
        previous    LinkedList$Entry<E>

除了插入到列表中间更容易之外——从链表中间删除也比从数组中删除容易得多。

但坦率地说，我从未使用过链表。每当我需要快速插入和删除时，我也需要快速查找，所以我使用HashSet或Dictionary。

这实际上是一个效率问题，在链表中插入、删除或移动(而不是简单地交换)元素的开销是最小的，即操作本身是O(1)，而不是O(n)。如果您大量操作数据列表，这可能会产生显著的差异。您可以根据对数据类型的操作方式选择数据类型，并为所使用的算法选择最有效的数据类型。

数组和链表之间的区别在于，数组是基于索引的数据结构，每个元素都与一个索引相关联，而链表是使用引用的数据结构，每个节点都被引用到另一个节点。在数组大小是固定的，而在链表大小是不固定的。

对我来说是这样的，

Access Linked Lists allow only sequential access to elements. Thus the algorithmic complexities is order of O(n) Arrays allow random access to its elements and thus the complexity is order of O(1) Storage Linked lists require an extra storage for references. This makes them impractical for lists of small data items such as characters or boolean values. Arrays do not need an extra storage to point to next data item. Each element can be accessed via indexes. Size The size of Linked lists are dynamic by nature. The size of array is restricted to declaration. Insertion/Deletion Elements can be inserted and deleted in linked lists indefinitely. Insertion/Deletion of values in arrays are very expensive. It requires memory reallocation.

假设您有一个有序集，您还想通过添加和删除元素来修改它。此外，您需要能够以这样的方式保留对元素的引用，以便稍后可以获得前一个或下一个元素。例如，一本书中的待办事项列表或一组段落。

首先，我们应该注意到，如果您想在集合本身之外保留对对象的引用，那么您可能最终会将指针存储在数组中，而不是存储对象本身。否则你将无法插入到数组中-如果对象嵌入到数组中，它们将在插入期间移动，并且任何指向它们的指针都将无效。数组下标也是如此。

您的第一个问题，正如您自己所注意到的，是插入链表允许插入O(1)，但数组通常需要O(n)。这个问题可以部分克服——可以创建一种数据结构，提供类似数组的按顺序访问接口，其中读和写在最坏的情况下都是对数的。

Your second, and more severe problem is that given an element finding next element is O(n). If the set was not modified you could retain the index of the element as the reference instead of the pointer thus making find-next an O(1) operation, but as it is all you have is a pointer to the object itself and no way to determine its current index in the array other than by scanning the entire "array". This is an insurmountable problem for arrays - even if you can optimized insertions, there is nothing you can do to optimize find-next type operation.