一般来说，字符串连接应该优先于string .format。后者有两个主要缺点:

它不以本地方式对要构建的字符串进行编码。 构建过程编码在字符串中。

第一点，我的意思是不可能理解String.format()调用在一次连续传递中所做的事情。人们被迫在格式字符串和参数之间来回切换，同时计算参数的位置。对于短连接，这不是什么大问题。但是，在这些情况下，字符串连接不那么详细。

第2点，我的意思是构建过程的重要部分编码在格式字符串中(使用DSL)。使用字符串表示代码有很多缺点。它本身不是类型安全的，并且使语法高亮显示、代码分析和优化等变得复杂。

当然，在使用Java语言之外的工具或框架时，可能会出现新的因素。

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

由于有关于性能的讨论，我想我应该添加一个包含StringBuilder的比较。事实上，它比concat更快，当然也比String更快。格式选项。

为了使这成为一种苹果对苹果的比较，我在循环中而不是在外部实例化了一个新的StringBuilder(这实际上比只实例化一个更快，这很可能是由于在一个构建器的末尾为循环追加重新分配空间的开销)。

    String formatString = "Hi %s; Hi to you %s";

    long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
    for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
        String s = String.format(formatString, i, +i * 2);
    }

    long end = System.currentTimeMillis();
    log.info("Format = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");

    start = System.currentTimeMillis();

    for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
        String s = "Hi " + i + "; Hi to you " + i * 2;
    }

    end = System.currentTimeMillis();

    log.info("Concatenation = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");

    start = System.currentTimeMillis();

    for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
        StringBuilder bldString = new StringBuilder("Hi ");
        bldString.append(i).append("; Hi to you ").append(i * 2);
    }

    end = System.currentTimeMillis();

    log.info("String Builder = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");

2012-01-11 16:30:46,058 INFO [TestMain] - Format = 1416毫秒 2012-01-11 16:30:46,190 INFO [TestMain] -连接= 134毫秒 2012-01-11 16:30:46,313 INFO [TestMain] - String Builder = 117毫秒

错误的测试重复多次 不应该使用{}%s。

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("Wrong use of the message format  = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");

start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) {
  String s = String.format("Hi {0}; Hi to you {1}", i, +i * 2);
}
end = System.currentTimeMillis();
System.out.println("Good use of the message format = " + ((end - start)) + " millisecond");

}

Concatenation = 88 millisecond
Wrong use of the message format  = 1075 millisecond 
Good use of the message format = 376 millisecond

.format的一个问题是失去了静态类型安全性。格式的参数可能过少，格式说明符的类型也可能错误——这两种情况都会导致运行时出现IllegalFormatException异常，因此可能会生成破坏生产的日志代码。

相反，+的参数可以由编译器测试。

printf的安全历史(格式化函数是在它的基础上建模的)是漫长而可怕的。

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)