有没有理由在下面选择a CharBuffer
到a char[]
:
CharBuffer buf = CharBuffer.allocate(DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE); while( in.read(buf) >= 0 ) { out.append( buf.flip() ); buf.clear(); }
与
char[] buf = new char[DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE]; int n; while( (n = in.read(buf)) >= 0 ) { out.write( buf, 0, n ); }
(in
a Reader
和out
a 在哪里Writer
)?
不,CharBuffer
在这种情况下,没有理由更喜欢.
但是,一般而言,CharBuffer
(和ByteBuffer
)可以真正简化API并鼓励正确处理.如果您正在设计公共API,那么绝对值得考虑面向缓冲区的API.
我想对这种比较进行微型基准测试.
以下是我写的课程.
事情是我无法相信CharBuffer表现如此糟糕.我有什么问题?
编辑:由于下面的第11条评论我已经编辑了代码和输出时间,所以在各方面都有更好的表现,但在时间上仍然存在显着差异.我还尝试了注释中提到的out2.append((CharBuffer)buff.flip())选项,但它比下面代码中使用的write选项慢得多.
结果:(以ms为单位)
char []:3411
CharBuffer:5653
public class CharBufferScratchBox { public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception { // Some Setup Stuff String smallString = "1111111111222222222233333333334444444444555555555566666666667777777777888888888899999999990000000000"; StringBuilder stringBuilder = new StringBuilder(); for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { stringBuilder.append(smallString); } String string = stringBuilder.toString(); int DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE = 1000; int ITTERATIONS = 10000; // char[] StringReader in1 = null; StringWriter out1 = null; Date start = new Date(); for (int i = 0; i < ITTERATIONS; i++) { in1 = new StringReader(string); out1 = new StringWriter(string.length()); char[] buf = new char[DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE]; int n; while ((n = in1.read(buf)) >= 0) { out1.write( buf, 0, n); } } Date done = new Date(); System.out.println("char[] : " + (done.getTime() - start.getTime())); // CharBuffer StringReader in2 = null; StringWriter out2 = null; start = new Date(); CharBuffer buff = CharBuffer.allocate(DEFAULT_BUFFER_SIZE); for (int i = 0; i < ITTERATIONS; i++) { in2 = new StringReader(string); out2 = new StringWriter(string.length()); int n; while ((n = in2.read(buff)) >= 0) { out2.write( buff.array(), 0, n); buff.clear(); } } done = new Date(); System.out.println("CharBuffer: " + (done.getTime() - start.getTime())); } }