Re: [jira] Created: (LUCENE-1257) Port to Java5

[robert engels]

That is opposite of my testing:...

The 'foreach' is consistently faster. The time difference is  
independent of the size of the array. What I know about JVM  
implementations, the foreach version SHOULD always be faster -  
because the no bounds checking needs to be done on the element access...

Times for the client JVM under 1.5_13

N = 10
indexed time = 14
foreach time = 8
N = 100
indexed time = 90
foreach time = 75
N = 1000
indexed time = 875
foreach time = 732
N = 10000
indexed time = 8801
foreach time = 7552
N = 100000
indexed time = 88566
foreach time = 75974

Times for the server JVM under 1.5_13

N = 10
indexed time = 21
foreach time = 21
N = 100
indexed time = 85
foreach time = 32
N = 1000
indexed time = 347
foreach time = 303
N = 10000
indexed time = 3472
foreach time = 3017
N = 100000
indexed time = 34158
foreach time = 30133

package test;

import junit.framework.TestCase;

public class LoopTest extends TestCase {
    public void testLoops() {

        int I = 100000;
        int N = 10;

        for (int factor = 0; factor < 5; factor++) {
            String[] strings = new String[N];

            for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
                strings[i] = "some string";
            }

            System.out.println("N = " + N);

            long len = 0;
            long start = System.currentTimeMillis();

            for (int i = 0; i < I; i++) {
                for (int j = 0; j < N; j++) {
                    len += strings[j].length();
                }
            }

	    System.out.println("indexed time = " + (System.currentTimeMillis 
() - start));

            len = 0;
            start = System.currentTimeMillis();
            for (int i = 0; i < I; i++) {
                for (String s : strings) {
                    len += s.length();
                }
            }
	    System.out.println("foreach time = " + (System.currentTimeMillis 
() - start));
            N *= 10;
        }
    }

}