遍历Map和List的几种方法和性能比较
2015-08-06 10:19
429 查看
public static void main(String[] args) { Map<String, String> map = new HashMap<String, String>(); map.put("1", "value1"); map.put("2", "value2"); map.put("3", "value3"); //第一种:普遍使用,二次取值 System.out.println("通过Map.keySet遍历key和value:"); for (String key : map.keySet()) { System.out.println("key= "+ key + " and value= " + map.get(key)); } //第二种 System.out.println("通过Map.entrySet使用iterator遍历key和value:"); Iterator<Map.Entry<String, String>> it = map.entrySet().iterator(); while (it.hasNext()) { Map.Entry<String, String> entry = it.next(); System.out.println("key= " + entry.getKey() + " and value= " + entry.getValue()); } //第三种:推荐,尤其是容量大时 System.out.println("通过Map.entrySet遍历key和value"); for (Map.Entry<String, String> entry : map.entrySet()) { System.out.println("key= " + entry.getKey() + " and value= " + entry.getValue()); } //第四种 System.out.println("通过Map.values()遍历所有的value,但不能遍历key"); for (String v : map.values()) { System.out.println("value= " + v); } }
主要介绍ArrayList和LinkedList这两种list的五种循环遍历方式,各种方式的性能测试对比,根据ArrayList和LinkedList的源码实现分析性能结果,总结结论。
通过本文你可以了解(1)List的五种遍历方式及各自性能 (2)foreach及Iterator的实现 (3)加深对ArrayList和LinkedList实现的了解。
阅读本文前希望你已经了解ArrayList顺序存储和LinkedList链式的结构,本文不对此进行介绍。
相关:HashMap循环遍历方式及其性能对比
1. List的五种遍历方式
下面只是简单介绍各种遍历示例(以ArrayList为例),各自优劣会在本文后面进行分析给出结论。
(1) for each循环
Java
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (Integer j : list) {
// use
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); for (Integer j : list) { // use j }
(2) 显示调用集合迭代器
Java
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); for (Iterator<Integer> iterator = list.iterator(); iterator.hasNext();) { iterator.next(); }
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();
for (Iterator<Integer> iterator = list.iterator(); iterator.hasNext();) {
iterator.next();
<span id="mce_marker" data-mce-type="bookmark"></span><span id="__caret">_</span>
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); Iterator<Integer> iterator = list.iterator(); while (iterator.hasNext()) { iterator.next(); }
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); Iterator<Integer> iterator = list.iterator(); while (iterator.hasNext()) { iterator.next(); }
Java
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); for (int j = 0; j < list.size(); j++) { list.get(j); }
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); for (int j = 0; j < list.size(); j++) { list.get(j); }
Java
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); int size = list.size(); for (int j = 0; j < size; j++) { list.get(j); }
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); int size = list.size(); for (int j = 0; j < size; j++) { list.get(j); }
Java
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); for (int j = list.size() - 1; j >= 0; j--) { list.get(j); }
List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>(); for (int j = list.size() - 1; j >= 0; j--) { list.get(j); }
2、List五种遍历方式的性能测试及对比
以下是性能测试代码,会输出不同数量级大小的ArrayList和LinkedList各种遍历方式所花费的时间。
ArrayList和LinkedList循环性能对比测试代码
PS:如果运行报异常in thread “main” java.lang.OutOfMemoryError: Java heap space,请将main函数里面list size的大小减小。
其中getArrayLists函数会返回不同size的ArrayList,getLinkedLists函数会返回不同size的LinkedList。
loopListCompare函数会分别用上面的遍历方式1-5去遍历每一个list数组(包含不同大小list)中的list。
print开头函数为输出辅助函数。
测试环境为Windows7 32位系统 3.2G双核CPU 4G内存,Java 7,Eclipse -Xms512m -Xmx512m
最终测试结果如下:
compare loop performance of ArrayList
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
list size | 10,000 | 100,000 | 1,000,000 | 10,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for each | 1 ms | 3 ms | 14 ms | 152 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for iterator | 0 ms | 1 ms | 12 ms | 114 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for list.size() | 1 ms | 1 ms | 13 ms | 128 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 6 ms | 62 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 6 ms | 63 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
compare loop performance of LinkedList
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
list size | 100 | 1,000 | 10,000 | 100,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for each | 0 ms | 1 ms | 1 ms | 2 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for iterator | 0 ms | 0 ms | 0 ms | 2 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for list.size() | 0 ms | 1 ms | 73 ms | 7972 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 67 ms | 8216 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 67 ms | 8277 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 | compare loop performance of ArrayList ----------------------------------------------------------------------- list size | 10,000 | 100,000 | 1,000,000 | 10,000,000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for each | 1 ms | 3 ms | 14 ms | 152 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for iterator | 0 ms | 1 ms | 12 ms | 114 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for list.size() | 1 ms | 1 ms | 13 ms | 128 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 6 ms | 62 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 6 ms | 63 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- compare loop performance of LinkedList ----------------------------------------------------------------------- list size | 100 | 1,000 | 10,000 | 100,000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for each | 0 ms | 1 ms | 1 ms | 2 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for iterator | 0 ms | 0 ms | 0 ms | 2 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for list.size() | 0 ms | 1 ms | 73 ms | 7972 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 67 ms | 8216 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 67 ms | 8277 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
表横向为同一遍历方式不同大小list遍历的时间消耗,纵向为同一list不同遍历方式遍历的时间消耗。
PS:由于首次遍历List会稍微多耗时一点,for each的结果稍微有点偏差,将测试代码中的几个Type顺序调换会发现,for each耗时和for iterator接近。
3、遍历方式性能测试结果分析
(1) foreach介绍
foreach是Java SE5.0引入的功能很强的循环结构,for (Integer j : list)应读作for each int in list。
for (Integer j : list)实现几乎等价于
Java
Iterator<Integer> iterator = list.iterator();
while(iterator.hasNext()) {
Integer j = iterator.next();
}
1 2 3 4 | Iterator<Integer> iterator = list.iterator(); while(iterator.hasNext()) { Integer j = iterator.next(); } |
这时我们已经发现foreach的一大好处,简单一行实现了四行的功能,使得代码简洁美观,另一大好处是相对于下标循环而言的,foreach不必关心下标初始值和终止值及越界等,所以不易出错。Effective-Java中推荐使用此种写法遍历,本文会验证这个说法。
使用foreach结构的类对象必须实现了Iterable接口,Java的Collection继承自此接口,List实现了Collection,这个接口仅包含一个函数,源码如下:
Java
package java.lang;
import java.util.Iterator;
/**
* Implementing this interface allows an object to be the target of
* the "foreach" statement.
*
* @param <T> the type of elements returned by the iterator
*
* @since 1.5
*/
public interface Iterable<T> {
/**
* Returns an iterator over a set of elements of type T.
*
* @return an Iterator.
*/
Iterator<T> iterator();
}
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 | package java.lang; import java.util.Iterator; /** * Implementing this interface allows an object to be the target of * the "foreach" statement. * * @param <T> the type of elements returned by the iterator * * @since 1.5 */ public interface Iterable<T> { /** * Returns an iterator over a set of elements of type T. * * @return an Iterator. */ Iterator<T> iterator(); } |
Java
public interface Iterator<E> {
boolean hasNext();
E next();
void remove();
}
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 | public interface Iterator<E> { boolean hasNext(); E next(); void remove(); } |
compare loop performance of ArrayList
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
list size | 10,000 | 100,000 | 1,000,000 | 10,000,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for each | 1 ms | 3 ms | 14 ms | 152 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for iterator | 0 ms | 1 ms | 12 ms | 114 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for list.size() | 1 ms | 1 ms | 13 ms | 128 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 6 ms | 62 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 6 ms | 63 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | compare loop performance of ArrayList ----------------------------------------------------------------------- list size | 10,000 | 100,000 | 1,000,000 | 10,000,000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for each | 1 ms | 3 ms | 14 ms | 152 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for iterator | 0 ms | 1 ms | 12 ms | 114 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for list.size() | 1 ms | 1 ms | 13 ms | 128 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 6 ms | 62 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 6 ms | 63 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
从上面我们可以看出:
a. 在ArrayList大小为十万之前,五种遍历方式时间消耗几乎一样
b. 在十万以后,第四、五种遍历方式快于前三种,get方式优于Iterator方式,并且
Java
int size = list.size();
for (int j = 0; j < size; j++) {
list.get(j);
}
1 2 3 4 | int size = list.size(); for (int j = 0; j < size; j++) { list.get(j); } |
Java
private class Itr implements Iterator<E> {
int cursor; // index of next element to return
int lastRet = -1; // index of last element returned; -1 if no such
int expectedModCount = modCount;
public boolean hasNext() {
return cursor != size;
}
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
public E next() {
checkForComodification();
int i = cursor;
if (i >= size)
throw new NoSuchElementException();
Object[] elementData = ArrayList.this.elementData;
if (i >= elementData.length)
throw new ConcurrentModificationException();
cursor = i + 1;
return (E) elementData[lastRet = i];
}
……
}
public E get(int index) {
rangeCheck(index);
return elementData(index)
private class Itr implements Iterator<E> { int cursor; // index of next element to return int lastRet = -1; // index of last element returned; -1 if no such int expectedModCount = modCount; public boolean hasNext() { return cursor != size; } @SuppressWarnings("unchecked") public E next() { checkForComodification(); int i = cursor; if (i >= size) throw new NoSuchElementException(); Object[] elementData = ArrayList.this.elementData; if (i >= elementData.length) throw new ConcurrentModificationException(); cursor = i + 1; return (E) elementData[lastRet = i]; } …… } public E get(int index) { rangeCheck(index); return elementData(index); } |
c . 从上可以看出即便在千万大小的ArrayList中,几种遍历方式相差也不过50ms左右,且在常用的十万左右时间几乎相等,考虑foreach的优点,我们大可选用foreach这种简便方式进行遍历。
(3) LinkedList遍历方式结果分析
compare loop performance of LinkedList
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
list size | 100 | 1,000 | 10,000 | 100,000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for each | 0 ms | 1 ms | 1 ms | 2 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for iterator | 0 ms | 0 ms | 0 ms | 2 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for list.size() | 0 ms | 1 ms | 73 ms | 7972 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 67 ms | 8216 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 67 ms | 8277 ms
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | compare loop performance of LinkedList ----------------------------------------------------------------------- list size | 100 | 1,000 | 10,000 | 100,000 ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for each | 0 ms | 1 ms | 1 ms | 2 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for iterator | 0 ms | 0 ms | 0 ms | 2 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for list.size() | 0 ms | 1 ms | 73 ms | 7972 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for size = list.size() | 0 ms | 0 ms | 67 ms | 8216 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- for j-- | 0 ms | 1 ms | 67 ms | 8277 ms ----------------------------------------------------------------------- |
从上面我们可以看出:
a 在LinkedList大小接近一万时,get方式和Iterator方式就已经差了差不多两个数量级,十万时Iterator方式性能已经远胜于get方式。
我们看看LinkedList中迭代器和get方法的实现
Java
private class ListItr implements ListIterator<E> { private Node<E> lastReturned = null; private Node<E> next; private int nextIndex; private int expectedModCount = modCount; ListItr(int index) { // assert isPositionIndex(index); next = (index == size) ? null : node(index); nextIndex = index; } public boolean hasNext() { return nextIndex < size; } public E next() { checkForComodification(); if (!hasNext()) throw new NoSuchElementException(); lastReturned = next; next = next.next; nextIndex++; return lastReturned.item; } …… } public E get(int index) { checkElementIndex(index); return node(index).item; } /** * Returns the (non-null) Node at the specified element index. */ Node<E> node(int index) { // assert isElementIndex(index); if (index < (size >> 1)) { Node<E> x = first; for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) x = x.next; return x; } else { Node<E> x = last; for (int i = size - 1; i > index; i--) x = x.prev; return x; } }
private class ListItr implements ListIterator<E> { private Node<E> lastReturned = null; private Node<E> next; private int nextIndex; private int expectedModCount = modCount; ListItr(int index) { // assert isPositionIndex(index); next = (index == size) ? null : node(index); nextIndex = index; } public boolean hasNext() { return nextIndex < size; } public E next() { checkForComodification(); if (!hasNext()) throw new NoSuchElementException(); lastReturned = next; next = next.next; nextIndex++; return lastReturned.item; } …… } public E get(int index) { checkElementIndex(index); return node(index).item; } /** * Returns the (non-null) Node at the specified element index. */ Node<E> node(int index) { // assert isElementIndex(index); if (index < (size >> 1)) { Node<E> x = first; for (int i = 0; i < index; i++) x = x.next; return x; } else { Node<E> x = last; for (int i = size - 1; i > index; i--) x = x.prev; return x; } }
从上面代码中可以看出LinkedList迭代器的next函数只是通过next指针快速得到下一个元素并返回。而get方法会从头遍历直到index下标,查找一个元素时间复杂度为哦O(n),遍历的时间复杂度就达到了O(n2)。
所以对于LinkedList的遍历推荐使用foreach,避免使用get方式遍历。
(4) ArrayList和LinkedList遍历方式结果对比分析
从上面的数量级来看,同样是foreach循环遍历,ArrayList和LinkedList时间差不多,可将本例稍作修改加大list size会发现两者基本在一个数量级上。
但ArrayList get函数直接定位获取的方式时间复杂度为O(1),而LinkedList的get函数时间复杂度为O(n)。
再结合考虑空间消耗的话,建议首选ArrayList。对于个别插入删除非常多的可以使用LinkedList。
4、结论总结
通过上面的分析我们基本可以总结下:
(1) 无论ArrayList还是LinkedList,遍历建议使用foreach,尤其是数据量较大时LinkedList避免使用get遍历。
(2) List使用首选ArrayList。对于个别插入删除非常多的可以使用LinkedList。
(3) 可能在遍历List循环内部需要使用到下标,这时综合考虑下是使用foreach和自增count还是get方式。
相关文章推荐
- POJ 1258:Agri-Net Prim最小生成树模板题
- 南邮 OJ 1627 语言识别问题
- CentOS下创建配置RAID1
- MySQL--用户管理和权限
- Leetcode42 Trapping Rain Water
- Hdu 5351 MZL's Border 2015ACM多校对抗赛第五场
- hi3516a之交叉编译rtmpdump
- 可重入函数与不可重入函数
- 【采集层】Kafka 与 Flume 如何选择
- Java 并发工具包 java.util.concurrent 用户指南
- spinner选择图像的简单应用
- 《手把手教你学51单片机-C语言》之十一--------UART串口通信
- FireFox 下selected = selected失效
- C#下没有注册类 (异常来自 HRESULT:0x80040154 (REGDB_E_CLASSNOTREG))
- <meta http-equiv="X-UA-Compatible" content="IE=edge,chrome=1">
- 【转】测试思想-测试设计 精简测试用例编写
- C# ActiveX开发及安装部署
- 顺序表(C语言)
- JAVA基础篇三(Java,C++中的异常机制)
- 8月初28家中国域名商六类国际域名注册保有量统计