原始连接:http://rvelthuis.blogspot.tw/2018/01/strings-on-other-platforms-than-32-bit.html

Strings too slow outside WIN32?

 

In a recent debate I had it was said that strings in the Win64 runtime are too slow to be useful. That is, in my opinion, a gross exaggeration. It is true that the Win32 runtime library (RTL) has benefited a lot from the work of the FastCode project, usually with routines in extremely clever assembler. For all other platforms, often the routines are in plain Object Pascal, so no assembler is being used. Also, far fewer routines have been replaced by clever implementations.

One very obvious example of this is the Pos function, which searches if a certain string (I call that the Needle) can be found in a larger one (the Haystack). The Win32 implementation is in highly optimized assembler, written by Aleksandr Sharahov from the FastCode project, and licensed by CodeGear. The Win64 implementation is in plain Pascal (PUREPASCAL). But the implementation for UnicodeString is not the same, or even similar, to the implementation for AnsiString!

The implementation for UnicodeString is slower than the same routine for Win32. On my system a search in Win64 takes approx. 1.8 × the time it needs in Win32. On Win32, Pos for AnsiString is about as fast (or sometimes even slightly faster than) Pos for UnicodeString. But on Win64, Pos for AnsiString takes 2 × the time Pos for UnicodeString needs!

If you look at the sources in System.pas, you'll see that the Unicode version is slightly better optimized (searching for the first Char in the Needle first, and only checking the rest if a match was found).

For fun, I took the code for the UnicodeString implementation and converted it to work for AnsiString. It was slightly faster than System.Pos for UnicodeString, instead of 2 times as slow. I wonder why, in System.pas, the AnsiString implementation does not simply use the same code as that for UnicodeString, like I did. If I were a suspicious person, I would think it was done on purpose, to deprecate AnsiString by making it less usable.

But even that can be improved upon. I wrote three implementations of my own routine, one for AnsiString, one for UnicodeString and one for TBytes (many people have complained that TBytes lacks something like Pos and that was the reason they maintained the incredibly bad habit of using strings to store binary data — <shudder> — I wanted to take away that silly argument).

Code

Here is the code for my RVPosExA function (for what it's worth: these days, there is no difference between PosEx and Pos anymore: both have the exact same functionality and signature):

function RVPosExA(const Needle, Haystack: AnsiString;
Offset: Integer = 1): Integer;
type
PUInt32 = ^UInt32;
PUInt16 = ^UInt16;
{$IFNDEF CPU32BITS}
var
LNeedleTip: UInt32;
PNeedle: PAnsiChar;
PHaystack, PEnd: PAnsiChar;
LLenNeedle: Integer;
LCmpMemOffset: Integer;
{$ENDIF}
begin
{$IFDEF CPU32BITS}
// FastCode (asm) implementation.
Result := System.Pos(Needle, Haystack, Offset);
{$ELSE}
if Offset - 1 + Length(Needle) > Length(Haystack) then
Exit(0);
Result := 0;
PHaystack := PAnsiChar(Haystack) + Offset - 1;
PEnd := PHaystack + Length(Haystack) - Length(Needle) + 1;
case Length(Needle) of
0: Exit(0);
1:
begin
LNeedleTip := PByte(Needle)^;
while PHaystack < PEnd do
if
PByte(PHaystack)^ = LNeedleTip then
Exit(PHaystack - PAnsiChar(Haystack) + 1)
else
Inc(PHaystack);
Exit(0);
end;
2:
begin
LNeedleTip := PUInt16(Needle)^;
while PHaystack < PEnd do
if
PUInt16(Haystack)^ = LNeedleTip then
Exit(PHayStack - PAnsiChar(Haystack) + 1)
else
Inc(PHaystack);
Exit(0);
end;
3:
begin
LNeedleTip := PUInt32(Needle)^; // if Needle is length 3, then top byte
// is the #0 terminator

while PHaystack < PEnd do
if ((PUInt32(Haystack)^ xor LNeedleTip) and $FFFFFF) = 0 then
Exit(PHaystack - PAnsiChar(Haystack) + 1)
else
Inc(PHaystack);
Exit(0);
end;
4:
begin
LNeedleTip := PUInt32(Needle)^;
while PHaystack < PEnd do
if PUInt32(Haystack)^ = LNeedleTip then
Exit(PHaystack - PAnsiChar(Haystack) + 1)
else
Inc(PHaystack);
Exit(0);
end;
else
begin

LCmpMemOffset := SizeOf(UInt32) div SizeOf(AnsiChar);
PNeedle := PAnsiChar(Needle) + LCmpMemOffset;
LLenNeedle := Length(Needle) - LCmpMemOffset;
LNeedleTip := PUInt32(Needle)^;
while PHaystack < PEnd do
if (PUInt32(PHaystack)^ = LNeedleTip) and
CompareMem(PHaystack + LCmpMemOffset, PNeedle, LLenNeedle) then
Exit(PHaystack - PAnsiChar(Haystack) + 1)
else
Inc(PHaystack);
end;
end;
{$ENDIF}
end;

As you can see, under Win32, it simply jumps to System.Pos, as that is the fastest anyway. But on all other platforms, it searches the Haystack 4-byte-wise (if the Needle is larger than 4 elements), and if it found something, then it searches the rest using CompareMem.

Timing

Here is a slightly reformatted output of a test program (I put the WIN32 and the WIN64 columns beside each other, to save space):

Different versions of Pos(Needle, Haystack: <sometype>; Offset: Integer): Integer
where <sometype> is UnicodeString, AnsiString or TBytes Testing with Haystack lengths of 50, 200, 3000, 4000 and 300000
and Needle lengths of 1, 3, 8 and 20
5 * 4 * 2000 = 40000 loops WIN64 WIN32 UnicodeString UnicodeString
------------- -------------
System.Pos: 2428 ms System.Pos: 1051 ms
StrUtils.PosEx: 2258 ms StrUtils.PosEx: 1070 ms
RVPosExU: 1071 ms RVPosExU: 1050 ms AnsiString AnsiString
---------- ----------
System.Pos: 4956 ms System.Pos: 1046 ms
AnsiStrings.PosEx: 4959 ms AnsiStrings.PosEx: 1051 ms
OrgPosA: 5129 ms OrgPosA: 5712 ms
PosUModForA: 1958 ms PosUModForA: 3744 ms
RVPosExA: 1322 ms RVPosExA: 1086 ms TBytes TBytes
------ ------
RVPosEXB: 998 ms RVPosEXB: 2754 ms Haystack: random string of 500000000 ASCII characters or bytes
Needle: last 10 characters of Haystack = 'WRDURJVDFA' WIN64 WIN32 UnicodeString UnicodeString
------------- -------------
System.Pos: 847 ms System.Pos: 421 ms
Strutils.PosEx: 827 ms Strutils.PosEx: 414 ms
RVPosExU: 421 ms RVPosExU: 438 ms AnsiString AnsiString
---------- ----------
System.Pos: 1735 ms System.Pos: 428 ms
AnsiStrings.PosEx: 1831 ms AnsiStrings.PosEx: 428 ms
OrgPosA: 1749 ms OrgPosA: 2687 ms
PosUModForA: 708 ms PosUModForA: 1525 ms
RVPosExA: 368 ms RVPosExA: 423 ms
RvPosExA(,,Offset): 200 ms RvPosExA(,,Offset): 220 ms TBytes TBytes
------ ------
RVPosExB(TBytes): 385 ms RVPosExB(TBytes): 1095 ms

The routines RVPosExA, RVPosExU and RVPosExB are my implementations for AnsiString, UnicodeString and TBytes respectively. OrgPosA is the original code for Pos for AnsiString, while PosUModForA is the original PUREPASCAL code for Pos for UnicodeString, modified for AnsiString.

As you can see, the PosUModForA routine is almost twice as fast as the rather braindead OrgPosA, and in WIN32, the RVPosEx<A/U/B> implementations are faster than the others.

I didn't check, but it is well possible that one of the plain Pascal versions of the FastCode project is faster. But for me, this implementation is a start and proof, that with a few simple optimizations string routines could be made faster. Perhaps, one day, Embarcadero will adopt more of the plain Pascal code from the FastCode project.

The code for the routines and the program that produces the output above can be downloaded from my website.

delphi 中的win32 以外到平台的字符串处理一定慢吗?(转载)的更多相关文章

  1. BCB/Delphi中常用的VCL函数说明(字符串函数)

    本文档是ccrun(老妖)根据网上资料整理而成. --------------------内存分配--------------------函数名称:AllocMem函数说明:在队中分配指定字节的内存块 ...

  2. Delphi中的关键字与保留字

    Delphi中的关键字与保留字 分类整理 Delphi 中的“关键字”和“保留字”,方便查询 感谢原作者的收集整理! 关键字和保留字的区别在于,关键字不推荐作标示符(编译器已经内置相关函数或者留给保留 ...

  3. Delphi中SendMessage使用说明(所有消息说明) good

    Delphi中SendMessage使用说明 SendMessage基础知识 函数功能:该函数将指定的消息发送到一个或多个窗口.此函数为指定的窗口调用窗口程序,直到窗口程序处理完消息再返回.而函数Po ...

  4. delphi中SendMessage使用说明

    SendMessage基础知识 函数功能:该函数将指定的消息发送到一个或多个窗口.此函数为指定的窗口调用窗口程序,直到窗口程序处理完消息再返回.而函数PostMessage不同,将一个消息寄送到一个线 ...

  5. Delphi中编辑word

      其他(28)   //启动Word   try     wordapplication1.connect;   except     messagedlg('word may not be ins ...

  6. Delphi中代替WebBrowser控件的第三方控件

    这几天,接触到在delphi中内嵌网页,用delphi7自带的TWebBrowser控件,显示的内容与本机IE8显示的不一样,但是跟装IE8之前的IE6显示一个效果.现在赶脚是下面两个原因中的一个: ...

  7. [转]Delphi中,让程序只运行一次的方法

    program onlyRunOne; uses Forms,Windows,SysUtils, Dialogs, Unit1 in 'Unit1.pas' {Form1}; {$R *.res} v ...

  8. 在C#中使用 Win32 和其他库

    C# 用户经常提出两个问题:“我为什么要另外编写代码来使用内置于 Windows® 中的功能?在框架中为什么没有相应的内容可以为我完成这一任务?”当框架小组构建他们的 .NET 部分时,他们评估了为使 ...

  9. DELPHI语法基础学习笔记-Windows 句柄、回调函数、函数重载等(Delphi中很少需要直接使用句柄,因为句柄藏在窗体、 位图及其他Delphi 对象的内部)

    函数重载重载的思想很简单:编译器允许你用同一名字定义多个函数或过程,只要它们所带的参数不同.实际上,编译器是通过检测参数来确定需要调用的例程.下面是从VCL 的数学单元(Math Unit)中摘录的一 ...

随机推荐

  1. DES算法实现(C++版)

    #include "memory.h" #include "stdio.h" enum {encrypt,decrypt};//ENCRYPT:加密,DECRY ...

  2. CentOS 下环境变量

    1. 显示环境变量HOME(不要把一个#号输进去了,#代表用户名) # echo #HOME /home/redbooks 2. 设置一个新的环境变量hello # export HELLO=&quo ...

  3. Codeforces Beta Round #16 (Div. 2 Only)

    Codeforces Beta Round #16 (Div. 2 Only) http://codeforces.com/contest/16 A 水题 #include<bits/stdc+ ...

  4. label 和input/textarea居中对齐

    设置label和input/textarea的vertical-align: middle;即可实现垂直方向居中对齐.有时候可能会有偏差,设置input的margin-top使看上去居中对齐

  5. Django的Rbac介绍1

    1.django的权限管理叫做RBAC 我们在百度上查看RBAC的概念如下 基于角色的权限访问控制(Role-Based Access Control)作为传统访问控制(自主访问,强制访问)的有前景的 ...

  6. ztree-持续更新中

    版本v3快速入门: 1,官网下载https://gitee.com/zTree/zTree_v3 2,zTree-zTree_v3-master\zTree_v3下复制css和js文件夹到项目下 3, ...

  7. sqlserver还原数据库失败,sql2008备份集中的数据库备份与现有的xxx数据库不同

    正常操作发现报标题错误,百度后解决思路如下(@参考文章)转到选项下面,勾选覆盖现有数据库即可

  8. iOS - 常用本机URL跳转设置

    import UIKit class ViewController: UIViewController { override func touchesBegan(_ touches: Set<U ...

  9. [leetcode]161. One Edit Distance编辑步数为一

    Given two strings s and t, determine if they are both one edit distance apart. Note: There are 3 pos ...

  10. python脚本计算斐波那契数列

    有一列数组[1,1,2,3,5,8,,,,,],计算第n个数字的大小 def abstract(n): fibs = [1, 1] for i in range(n-2): fibs.append(f ...