The following is from the Implementation Note section of Java doc of EnumMap :
Implementation note: All basic operations execute in constant time. They are likely (though not guaranteed) to be faster than their HashMap counterparts.
I have seen a similar line in the java doc for EnumSet
also . I want to know why is it more likely that EnumSets
and EnumMaps
will be more faster than their hashed counterparts ?
EnumSet
is backed by a bit array. Since the number of different items you can put in EnumSet
is known in advance, we can simply reserve one bit for each enum value. You can imagine similar optimization for Set<Byte>
or Set<Short>
, but it's not feasible for Set<Integer>
(you'd need 0.5 GiB of memory for 2^32 bits) or in general.
Thus basic operations like exists
or add
ar constant time (just like HashSet
) but they simply need to examine or set one bit. No hashCode()
computation. This is why EnumSet
is faster. Also more complex operations like union or easily implemented using bit manipulation techniques.
In OpenJDK there are two implementations of EnumSet
: RegularEnumSet
capable of handling enum with up to 64 values in long
and JumboEnumSet
for bigger enums (using long[]
). But it's just an implementation detail.
EnumMap
works on similar principles, but it uses Object[]
to store values while key (index) is implicitly inferred from Enum.ordinal()
.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/14536665/why-an-enumset-or-an-enummap-is-likely-to-be-more-performant-than-their-hashed-c