Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #25070
| From | Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.java.programmer |
| Subject | Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? |
| Date | 2013-08-20 20:03 +0200 |
| Organization | albasani.net |
| Message-ID | <kv0b1m$s23$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink) |
| References | <fcudnTCLD6xZ3I7PnZ2dnUVZ_gadnZ2d@giganews.com> |
Peter Olcott schrieb:
> It seems to me that all this unboxing and reboxing is a complete waste
> of CPU time. It would make much more sense to provide an
> Integer.Increment() member function that directly operates on the
> contained data.
Most probably the generated code for unboxing/boxing will
use Integer.intValue() to access the value and Integer.valueOf()
to create a new object.
Now Integer.valueOf() has a threshold, below this threshold
not a new object is created but an object is fetched from a
cache. Usually the threshold is 128.
In your present case thus, already for 99 an object from the
cache is fetched, and then for 100 also an object from the cache
is fetched, thus not involving any single heap allocation.
The heap allocation happens once when the Integer class
allocates its cache. Bottom line is that for values below
the threashold unboxing/boxing incures a low overhead.
The caching is possible because the Integer class is immutable.
Therefore a cached object can be returned. If the Integer class
were mutable, a cached object could not be returned, since the
client code could modify it.
Bye
P.S.: Here is the JDK 1.7.25 source code of Integer.valueOf:
/**
* Returns an {@code Integer} instance representing the specified
* {@code int} value. If a new {@code Integer} instance is not
* required, this method should generally be used in preference to
* the constructor {@link #Integer(int)}, as this method is likely
* to yield significantly better space and time performance by
* caching frequently requested values.
*
* This method will always cache values in the range -128 to 127,
* inclusive, and may cache other values outside of this range.
*
* @param i an {@code int} value.
* @return an {@code Integer} instance representing {@code i}.
* @since 1.5
*/
public static Integer valueOf(int i) {
assert IntegerCache.high >= 127;
if (i >= IntegerCache.low && i <= IntegerCache.high)
return IntegerCache.cache[i + (-IntegerCache.low)];
return new Integer(i);
}
Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Autoboxing and Performance ? Peter Olcott <OCR4Screen> - 2013-08-20 05:15 -0500
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-08-20 12:20 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Peter Olcott <OCR4Screen> - 2013-08-20 05:33 -0500
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2013-08-20 10:43 +0000
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Peter Olcott <OCR4Screen> - 2013-08-20 06:04 -0500
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-08-20 08:08 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-20 20:15 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-20 20:12 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-21 03:52 +0300
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Sebastian <news@seyweiler.dyndns.org> - 2013-08-21 07:27 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-21 18:43 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-22 08:08 +0300
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-22 07:56 +0300
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-08-22 10:51 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-08-22 19:36 +0000
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-08-22 13:01 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-08-22 21:19 +0000
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-08-22 14:39 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? markspace <markspace@nospam.nospam> - 2013-08-22 19:50 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-08-23 23:16 +0000
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-24 17:20 +0300
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-08-23 11:08 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-08-23 22:52 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jim Gibson <jimsgibson@gmail.com> - 2013-08-23 16:38 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-08-23 06:17 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-08-23 17:25 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-08-25 18:34 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jeff Higgins <jeff@invalid.invalid> - 2013-08-28 10:52 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-08-23 23:37 +0000
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2013-08-26 19:33 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Sven Köhler <remove-sven.koehler@gmail.com> - 2013-08-29 10:09 +0300
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-08-29 14:14 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-08-29 21:28 -0300
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-08-20 20:03 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-08-20 16:23 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-08-21 11:51 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-08-21 08:39 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-08-21 16:51 +0100
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-21 19:19 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-08-22 09:49 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Jan Burse <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2013-08-21 11:54 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-20 20:06 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-08-20 21:19 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-08-21 10:05 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-08-21 07:19 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-08-22 00:18 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2013-08-21 19:58 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-08-21 08:36 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? taqmcg@gmail.com - 2013-08-21 09:37 -0700
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-08-20 23:28 -0500
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-08-21 10:09 +0100
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-08-21 19:04 -0400
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arivald <NOSPAMarivald@interia.pl> - 2013-08-22 07:39 +0200
Re: Autoboxing and Performance ? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-08-29 01:42 -0300
csiph-web