From dev-return-86347-apmail-ant-dev-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org Fri Feb 18 04:30:57 2011
Return-Path: <dev-return-86347-apmail-ant-dev-archive=ant.apache.org@ant.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 78539 invoked from network); 18 Feb 2011 04:30:57 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 18 Feb 2011 04:30:57 -0000
Received: (qmail 11415 invoked by uid 500); 18 Feb 2011 04:30:57 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-ant-dev-archive@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 11078 invoked by uid 500); 18 Feb 2011 04:30:53 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@ant.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@ant.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@ant.apache.org>
List-Id: "Ant Developers List" <dev.ant.apache.org>
Reply-To: "Ant Developers List" <dev@ant.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@ant.apache.org
Received: (qmail 11070 invoked by uid 99); 18 Feb 2011 04:30:52 -0000
Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 04:30:52 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0
	tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of foamdino@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.45 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.212.45] (HELO mail-vw0-f45.google.com) (209.85.212.45)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Feb 2011 04:30:44 +0000
Received: by vws12 with SMTP id 12so1741139vws.4
        for <dev@ant.apache.org>; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 20:30:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=F+L8L2pKBHQsp1sZfH0pgE9c4O69FfG2KbEGkN1YVrg=;
        b=luW+C3wCbo3W59jGvHj9Ux1/3+d4BF/kgIwNubztqSacmz/92HmnY70VNNt4uFuWKv
         A+Y9QrjFYj8demFcThUBciE2UJIiWtCx0Ry6smjOw29KvolM74KUejOtuAHaZts6o5FP
         1JWqBjvBmIW3prlZkYkj72D8ZenaOuksVUSHA=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        b=qaU8Bgl+KQzBJ3H/UK/IiDgHOHIcUZBH63dZSJIujAFcHjhg9NbzHRRLyWAK7NqdZJ
         ytoWaei2EmYEU2Brnd32Ue5Tc1DVcbpp0nsovaKD6oi85E6UP3pEp90lbo4JymnSsqlr
         yqzynwIDZKes2qCpdA2IkAeFAWWlWUBV4kTdU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.52.161.225 with SMTP id xv1mr379322vdb.292.1298003423649; Thu,
 17 Feb 2011 20:30:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.220.61.207 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Feb 2011 20:30:23 -0800 (PST)
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 11:30:23 +0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTimxcaV0K7mrFJJE9nrmYOOmrWg9qyvzY0q_4NkD@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r1066963 - in /ant/core/trunk/src/main/org/apache/tools:
 ant/ ant/taskdefs/ ant/taskdefs/cvslib/ ant/taskdefs/email/
 ant/taskdefs/optional/ ant/taskdefs/optional/depend/ ant/taskdefs/optional/depend/constantpool/
 ant/taskdefs/optional
From: Kevin Jackson <foamdino@gmail.com>
To: Ant Developers List <dev@ant.apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

Hi,

>> On 02/04/2011 09:03 AM, Antoine Levy-Lambert wrote:
>>> I did not know that using a final variable for the upper bound of a loop instead of something.size() makes a difference in terms of performance.
>
>> Generally the preferred idiom is to use an iterator,
>
> Absolutely agreed, but that would have been a bigger change so I shied
> away from it (as well as from replacing Vectors with some other lists in
> various places).

Yeah the idiom I use is:

for(int i=0, len=list.size(); i<len; i++)

This is good as instead of calling the .size() method on every
execution of the loop it's essentially caching the value and using
that.  Secondly, the scope of the additional variable is limited to
just the loop.  Having the len variable defined outside the loop means
that you have something that is only for the loop existing beyond the
lifetime of the loop (until the return from the method).

But on the other hand defining the variable as final is probably a win
too as the complier will just replace it with a constant int.

In general though iterators are supposed to offer the 'best'
performance as they are micro optimized for the particular collection.
 On the other hand an iterator is another level of indirection :)

Interesting discussion - I tried to introduce some micro-optimizations
(pretty much like these) into the Tomcat codebase 8 years ago, but was
met with 'meh why bother?' responses as the thinking was that the vm
would pretty much make optimizations pointless.  I suppose it depends
on where the hotspots are.

Kev

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org