When and Why Should I Use TStringBuilder?

前端 未结 6 1516
你的背包
你的背包 2020-12-31 05:51

I converted my program from Delphi 4 to Delphi 2009 a year ago, mainly to make the jump to Unicode, but also to gain the benefits of all those years of Delphi improvements.<

相关标签:
6条回答
  • 2020-12-31 06:16

    I tried to improve a old routine that was parsing a text file (1.5GB). The routine was pretty dumb and it was building a string like this: Result:= Result+ buff[i];

    So, I though that TStringBuilder will add significant speed improvements. It turned out that the 'dumb' code was actually 114% faster than the 'improved' version with TStringBuilder.

    So, building a string from characters is NOT a place where you can obtain speed improvement with TStringBuilder.


    My StringBuilder (below) is 184.82 times (yes 184!!!!!!) faster than the classic s:= s+ chr. (Experiment on a 4MB string)

    Classic s:= s + c
    Time: 8502 ms

    procedure TfrmTester.btnClassicClick(Sender: TObject);
    VAR
       s: string;
       FileBody: string;
       c: Cardinal;
       i: Integer;
    begin
     FileBody:= ReadFile(File4MB);
     c:= GetTickCount;
     for i:= 1 to Length(FileBody) DO
      s:= s+ FileBody[i];
     Log.Lines.Add('Time: '+ IntToStr(GetTickCount-c) + 'ms');     // 8502 ms
    end;
    

    Prebuffered

    Time:  
         BuffSize= 10000;       // 10k  buffer = 406ms
         BuffSize= 100000;      // 100k buffer = 140ms
         BuffSize= 1000000;     // 1M   buffer = 46ms
    

    Code:

    procedure TfrmTester.btnBufferedClick(Sender: TObject);
    VAR
       s: string;
       FileBody: string;
       c: Cardinal;
       CurBuffLen, marker, i: Integer;
    begin
     FileBody:= ReadFile(File4MB);
     c:= GetTickCount;
    
     marker:= 1;
     CurBuffLen:= 0;
     for i:= 1 to Length(FileBody) DO
      begin
       if i > CurBuffLen then
        begin
         SetLength(s, CurBuffLen+ BuffSize);
         CurBuffLen:= Length(s)
        end;
       s[marker]:= FileBody[i];
       Inc(marker);
      end;
    
     SetLength(s, marker-1); { Cut down the prealocated buffer that we haven't used }  
     Log.Lines.Add('Time: '+ IntToStr(GetTickCount-c) + 'ms');
     if s <> FileBody
     then Log.Lines.Add('FAILED!');
    end;
    

    Prebuffered, as class

    Time:    
     BuffSize= 10000;       // 10k  buffer = 437ms       
     BuffSize= 100000;      // 100k buffer = 187ms        
     BuffSize= 1000000;     // 1M buffer = 78ms     
    

    Code:

    procedure TfrmTester.btnBuffClassClick(Sender: TObject);
    VAR
       StringBuff: TCStringBuff;
       s: string;
       FileBody: string;
       c: Cardinal;
       i: Integer;
    begin
     FileBody:= ReadFile(File4MB);
     c:= GetTickCount;
    
     StringBuff:= TCStringBuff.Create(BuffSize);
     TRY
       for i:= 1 to Length(FileBody) DO
        StringBuff.AddChar(filebody[i]);
       s:= StringBuff.GetResult;
     FINALLY
      FreeAndNil(StringBuff);
     END;
    
     Log.Lines.Add('Time: '+ IntToStr(GetTickCount-c) + 'ms');
     if s <> FileBody
     then Log.Lines.Add('FAILED!');
    end;
    

    And this is the class:

    { TCStringBuff }
    
    constructor TCStringBuff.Create(aBuffSize: Integer= 10000);
    begin
     BuffSize:= aBuffSize;
     marker:= 1;
     CurBuffLen:= 0;
     inp:= 1;
    end;
    
    function TCStringBuff.GetResult: string;
    begin
     SetLength(s, marker-1);                    { Cut down the prealocated buffer that we haven't used }
     Result:= s;
     s:= '';         { Free memory }
    end;
    
    procedure TCStringBuff.AddChar(Ch: Char);
    begin
     if inp > CurBuffLen then
      begin
       SetLength(s, CurBuffLen+ BuffSize);
       CurBuffLen:= Length(s)
      end;
    
     s[marker]:= Ch;
     Inc(marker);
     Inc(inp);
    end;
    

    Conclusion: Stop using s:= s + c if you have large (over 10K) strings. It might be true even if you have small strings but you do it often (for example, you have a function that is doing some string processing on a small string, but you call it often).

    _

    PS: You may also want to see this: https://www.delphitools.info/2013/10/30/efficient-string-building-in-delphi/2/

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-31 06:31

    To the best of my knowledge TStringBuilder was introduced just for some parity with .NET and Java, it seems to be more of a tick the box type feature than any major advance.

    Consensus seems to be that TStringBuilder is faster in some operations but slower in others.

    Your program sounds like an interesting one to do a before/after TStringBuilder comparison with but I wouldn't do it other than as an academic exercise.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-31 06:33

    Basically, I use these idioms for building strings. The most important differences are:

    • TStringBuilder.Create and Append pattern which adds new characters to the TStringBuilder instance.
    • TStringList.Create and Add pattern which adds new lines the to the Text of the TStringList instance.
    • The Format function to assemble strings based on format patterns.
    • Simple concatenation of string types for expressions with 3 or fewer values.

    For complex build patterns, the first make my code a lot cleaner, the second only if I add lines and often includes many of Format calls.

    The third makes my code cleaner when format patterns are important.

    I use the last one only when the expression is very simple.

    A few more differences between the first two idioms:

    • TStringBuilder has many overloads for Append, and also has AppendLine (with only two overloads) if you want to add lines like TStringList.Add can
    • TStringBuilder reallocates the underlying buffer with an over capacity scheme, which means that with large buffers and frequent appends, it can be a lot faster than TStringList
    • To get the TStringBuilder content, you have to call the ToString method which can slow things down.

    So: speed is not the most important matter to choose your string appending idiom. Readable code is.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-31 06:36

    TStringBuilder was introduced solely to provide a source code compatible mechanism for applications to perform string handling in Delphi and Delphi.NET. You sacrifice some speed in Delphi for some potentially significant benefits in Delphi.NET

    The StringBuilder concept in .NET addresses performance issues with the string implementation on that platform, issues that the Delphi (native code) platform simply does not have.

    If you are not writing code that needs to be compiled for both native code and Delphi.NET then there is simply no reason to use TStringBuilder.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-31 06:40

    According to Marco Cantu not for speed, but you might get cleaner code and better code compatibility with .Net. Here (and some corrections here) another speed test with TStringBuilder not being faster.

    0 讨论(0)
  • 2020-12-31 06:41

    TStringBuilder is basically just a me-too feature, like LachlanG said. It's needed in .NET because CLR strings are immutable, but Delphi doesn't have that problem so it doesn't really require a string builder as a workaround.

    0 讨论(0)
提交回复
热议问题