使用String和使用String之间有明显的区别吗?格式和字符串连接在Java?
我倾向于使用String。格式,但偶尔会滑倒和使用连接。我想知道哪个比哪个好。
在我看来,String。Format让你在“格式化”字符串时更强大;连接意味着您不必担心不小心输入了额外的%s或遗漏了一个。
字符串。格式也更短。
哪一个更容易读,取决于你的大脑如何工作。
使用String和使用String之间有明显的区别吗?格式和字符串连接在Java?
我倾向于使用String。格式,但偶尔会滑倒和使用连接。我想知道哪个比哪个好。
在我看来,String。Format让你在“格式化”字符串时更强大;连接意味着您不必担心不小心输入了额外的%s或遗漏了一个。
字符串。格式也更短。
哪一个更容易读,取决于你的大脑如何工作。
当前回答
性能:
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++){
String s = "Hi " + i + "; Hi to you " + i*2;
}
long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Concatenation = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond") ;
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++){
String s = String.format("Hi %s; Hi to you %s",i, + i*2);
}
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Format = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");
}
授时结果如下:
串联= 265毫秒 格式= 4141毫秒
因此,连接比String.format快得多。
其他回答
性能:
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++){
String s = "Hi " + i + "; Hi to you " + i*2;
}
long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Concatenation = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond") ;
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++){
String s = String.format("Hi %s; Hi to you %s",i, + i*2);
}
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Format = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");
}
授时结果如下:
串联= 265毫秒 格式= 4141毫秒
因此,连接比String.format快得多。
我想我们可以用MessageFormat。格式,因为它应该在可读性和性能方面都很好。
我使用了与Icaro在上面的回答中使用的相同的程序,并通过添加使用MessageFormat来解释性能数字的代码来增强它。
public static void main(String[] args) {
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
String s = "Hi " + i + "; Hi to you " + i * 2;
}
long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Concatenation = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
String s = String.format("Hi %s; Hi to you %s", i, +i * 2);
}
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Format = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
String s = MessageFormat.format("Hi %s; Hi to you %s", i, +i * 2);
}
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("MessageFormat = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");
}
串联= 69毫秒 格式= 1435毫秒 MessageFormat = 200毫秒
更新:
根据SonarLint报告,printf风格的格式字符串应该正确使用(squid:S3457)
Because printf-style format strings are interpreted at runtime, rather than validated by the compiler, they can contain errors that result in the wrong strings being created. This rule statically validates the correlation of printf-style format strings to their arguments when calling the format(...) methods of java.util.Formatter, java.lang.String, java.io.PrintStream, MessageFormat, and java.io.PrintWriter classes and the printf(...) methods of java.io.PrintStream or java.io.PrintWriter classes.
我用括号替换了printf样式,得到了一些有趣的结果,如下所示。
串联= 69毫秒格式= 1107毫秒 格式:括号= 416毫秒MessageFormat = 215 毫秒MessageFormat:括号= 2517毫秒
我的结论是: 如上所述,使用String。带尖括号的格式应该是一个很好的选择,以获得良好的可读性和性能。
我建议使用String.format()是更好的实践。主要原因是String.format()可以更容易地使用从资源文件加载的文本进行本地化,而拼接如果不为每种语言生成带有不同代码的新可执行文件就无法进行本地化。
如果你打算让你的应用程序本地化,你也应该养成为你的格式标记指定参数位置的习惯:
"Hello %1$s the time is %2$t"
然后可以对其进行本地化,并交换名称和时间令牌,而不需要重新编译可执行文件以考虑不同的顺序。对于参数位置,你也可以重复使用相同的参数,而不需要将其传递给函数两次:
String.format("Hello %1$s, your name is %1$s and the time is %2$t", name, time)
It takes a little time to get used to String.Format, but it's worth it in most cases. In the world of NRA (never repeat anything) it's extremely useful to keep your tokenized messages (logging or user) in a Constant library (I prefer what amounts to a static class) and call them as necessary with String.Format regardless of whether you are localizing or not. Trying to use such a library with a concatenation method is harder to read, troubleshoot, proofread, and manage with any any approach that requires concatenation. Replacement is an option, but I doubt it's performant. After years of use, my biggest problem with String.Format is the length of the call is inconveniently long when I'm passing it into another function (like Msg), but that's easy to get around with a custom function to serve as an alias.
这是一个以毫秒为单位的多个样本大小的测试。
public class Time {
public static String sysFile = "/sys/class/camera/rear/rear_flash";
public static String cmdString = "echo %s > " + sysFile;
public static void main(String[] args) {
int i = 1;
for(int run=1; run <= 12; run++){
for(int test =1; test <= 2 ; test++){
System.out.println(
String.format("\nTEST: %s, RUN: %s, Iterations: %s",run,test,i));
test(run, i);
}
System.out.println("\n____________________________");
i = i*3;
}
}
public static void test(int run, int iterations){
long start = System.nanoTime();
for( int i=0;i<iterations; i++){
String s = "echo " + i + " > "+ sysFile;
}
long t = System.nanoTime() - start;
String r = String.format(" %-13s =%10d %s", "Concatenation",t,"nanosecond");
System.out.println(r) ;
start = System.nanoTime();
for( int i=0;i<iterations; i++){
String s = String.format(cmdString, i);
}
t = System.nanoTime() - start;
r = String.format(" %-13s =%10d %s", "Format",t,"nanosecond");
System.out.println(r);
start = System.nanoTime();
for( int i=0;i<iterations; i++){
StringBuilder b = new StringBuilder("echo ");
b.append(i).append(" > ").append(sysFile);
String s = b.toString();
}
t = System.nanoTime() - start;
r = String.format(" %-13s =%10d %s", "StringBuilder",t,"nanosecond");
System.out.println(r);
}
}
TEST: 1, RUN: 1, Iterations: 1
Concatenation = 14911 nanosecond
Format = 45026 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 3509 nanosecond
TEST: 1, RUN: 2, Iterations: 1
Concatenation = 3509 nanosecond
Format = 38594 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 3509 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 2, RUN: 1, Iterations: 3
Concatenation = 8479 nanosecond
Format = 94438 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 5263 nanosecond
TEST: 2, RUN: 2, Iterations: 3
Concatenation = 4970 nanosecond
Format = 92976 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 5848 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 3, RUN: 1, Iterations: 9
Concatenation = 11403 nanosecond
Format = 287115 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 14326 nanosecond
TEST: 3, RUN: 2, Iterations: 9
Concatenation = 12280 nanosecond
Format = 209051 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 11818 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 5, RUN: 1, Iterations: 81
Concatenation = 54383 nanosecond
Format = 1503113 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 40056 nanosecond
TEST: 5, RUN: 2, Iterations: 81
Concatenation = 44149 nanosecond
Format = 1264241 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 34208 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 6, RUN: 1, Iterations: 243
Concatenation = 76018 nanosecond
Format = 3210891 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 76603 nanosecond
TEST: 6, RUN: 2, Iterations: 243
Concatenation = 91222 nanosecond
Format = 2716773 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 73972 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 8, RUN: 1, Iterations: 2187
Concatenation = 527450 nanosecond
Format = 10291108 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 885027 nanosecond
TEST: 8, RUN: 2, Iterations: 2187
Concatenation = 526865 nanosecond
Format = 6294307 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 591773 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 10, RUN: 1, Iterations: 19683
Concatenation = 4592961 nanosecond
Format = 60114307 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 2129387 nanosecond
TEST: 10, RUN: 2, Iterations: 19683
Concatenation = 1850166 nanosecond
Format = 35940524 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 1885544 nanosecond
____________________________
TEST: 12, RUN: 1, Iterations: 177147
Concatenation = 26847286 nanosecond
Format = 126332877 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 17578914 nanosecond
TEST: 12, RUN: 2, Iterations: 177147
Concatenation = 24405056 nanosecond
Format = 129707207 nanosecond
StringBuilder = 12253840 nanosecond