为什么stoi比没有-O3的stringstream慢得多？

Question

今天我在谈论C++ 11中的新闻,如线程,to_string和stoi.

但事实上,所有这些在C++ 98中已经成为可能.

然后我决定比较旧库和新闻库:

C++ 11:

g ++ -std = c ++ 11 main.cpp

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <ctime>

using namespace std;

int main()
{
    clock_t tStart = clock();
    string input = "50";

    for (int i = 0; i < 50000; i++)
    {
        int number = stoi(input);
    }

    cout << (double)(clock() - tStart) << endl;
    return 0;
}

C++ 98

g ++ main.cpp

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <sstream>
#include <ctime>

using namespace std;

int main()
{
    clock_t tStart = clock();
    string input = "50";
    stringstream ss;

    for (int i = 0; i < 50000; i++)
    {
        int number;
        ss << input;
        ss >> number;
    }

    cout << (double)(clock() - tStart) << endl;
    return 0;
}

屏幕截图:

Windows 7轻型服务器:

Ubuntu 14.04:

Slackware Server 14.1通过SSH:

随着优化

Windows 7轻型服务器:

Ubuntu 14.04:

Slackware Server 14.1通过SSH:

配置:

Windows 7轻型服务器: Intel(R)Core(TM)i5-4590 CPU @ 3.30GHz

Ubuntu 14.04: Intel(R)Core(TM)i7-2670QM CPU @ 2.20GHz

Slackware Server 14.1通过SSH: Intel(R)Core(TM)i3-4150 CPU @ 3.50GHz

问题:

stoi和stringstream有什么区别？

为什么以及何时在字符串lib(stoi,to_string)中使用新闻函数？

最后......使用-O3,stoi速度要快得多,而sstream则不然.那么,-O3对stoi的作用比对sstream没有做的更多？

Answer 1

我刚刚检查过以下内容:

gcc -v:

Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=x86_64-alt-linux-gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/libexec/gcc/x86_64-alt-linux/5/lto-wrapper
Target: x86_64-alt-linux
Configured with: ../configure --host=x86_64-alt-linux --build=x86_64-alt-linux --target=x86_64-alt-linux --prefix=/usr --exec-prefix=/usr --bindir=/usr/bin --sbindir=/usr/sbin --sysconfdir=/etc --datadir=/usr/share --includedir=/usr/include --libdir=/usr/lib64 --libexecdir=/usr/libexec --localstatedir=/var/lib --sharedstatedir=/var/lib --mandir=/usr/share/man --infodir=/usr/share/info --disable-dependency-tracking --without-included-gettext --enable-shared --program-suffix=-5 --with-slibdir=/lib64 --with-bugurl=http://bugzilla.altlinux.org --enable-__cxa_atexit --enable-threads=posix --enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --without-included-gettext --enable-multilib --enable-gnu-unique-object --enable-linker-build-id --with-linker-hash-style=gnu --with-arch_32=i586 --with-tune_32=generic --with-multilib-list=m64,m32,mx32 --enable-bootstrap --enable-languages=c,c++,fortran,objc,obj-c++,java,ada,go,lto --enable-plugin --enable-java-awt=gtk --with-native-libdir=/usr/lib64/gcj-5 --with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/ecj.jar --with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-5-1.5.0.0/jre --enable-libgcj-multifile --disable-libjava-multilib --enable-java-maintainer-mode
Thread model: posix
gcc version 5.3.1 20151207 (ALT Linux 5.3.1-alt1) (GCC)

代码:

#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <chrono>
#include <sstream>

using namespace std;
using namespace chrono;

void stringstream_test(const string& input, int repetitions) {
    stringstream ss;
    auto start = steady_clock::now();
    for (int i = 0; i < repetitions; i++) {
        int number;
        ss << input;
        ss >> number;
    }

    auto end = steady_clock::now();
    auto dur = duration_cast<nanoseconds>(end - start);
    cout << "stringstream_test completed in " << dur.count() << " nanoseconds." << endl;
}

void stoi_test(const string& input, int repetitions) {
    auto start = steady_clock::now();
    for (int i = 0; i < repetitions; i++) {
        int number = stoi(input);
    }
    auto end = steady_clock::now();
    auto dur = duration_cast<nanoseconds>(end - start);
    cout << "stoi_test         completed in " << dur.count() << " nanoseconds." << endl;
}

int main() {
    stringstream_test("50", 500000);
    stoi_test("50", 500000);
    return 0;
}

编译为c++ -std=c++11 -O3 -o stoi_perf stoi_perf.cc.

结果,while true; do ./stoi_perf; done重复几次后收到并停止:

stringstream_test completed in 10449080 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 10437559 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 9074869 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 9895661 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 11516788 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 12266627 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 10017085 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 9468441 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 9957401 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 9483004 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 10069845 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 9657653 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 9568359 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 9162406 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 9868536 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 9166439 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 9059762 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 11558076 nanoseconds.
stringstream_test completed in 11673084 nanoseconds.
stoi_test         completed in 13432386 nanoseconds.
...

正如您可能看到,两个测试都给出了可比较的结果,有时候一个测试稍微好一点.我的工作站很繁忙(有一个后台进程完全吃掉了六个中的一个或两个核心)但即使在这样的条件下,测试结果看起来也令我满意.