Or am I measuring something else?
In this code I have a stack of tags (integers
). Each tag has a string representation (const char*
or std::string_view
).
In the loop stack values are converted to the corresponding string values. Those values are appended to a preallocated string or assigned to an array element.
The results show that the version with std::string_view
is slightly faster than the version with const char*
.
Code:
#include <array>
#include <iostream>
#include <chrono>
#include <stack>
#include <string_view>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
enum Tag : int { TAG_A, TAG_B, TAG_C, TAG_D, TAG_E, TAG_F };
constexpr const char* tag_value[] =
{ "AAA", "BBB", "CCC", "DDD", "EEE", "FFF" };
constexpr std::string_view tag_values[] =
{ "AAA", "BBB", "CCC", "DDD", "EEE", "FFF" };
const size_t iterations = 10000;
std::stack<Tag> stack_tag;
std::string out;
std::chrono::steady_clock::time_point begin;
std::chrono::steady_clock::time_point end;
auto prepareForBecnhmark = [&stack_tag, &out](){
for(size_t i=0; i<iterations; i++)
stack_tag.push(static_cast<Tag>(i%6));
out.clear();
out.reserve(iterations*10);
};
// Append to string
prepareForBecnhmark();
begin = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
for(size_t i=0; i<iterations; i++) {
out.append(tag_value[stack_tag.top()]);
stack_tag.pop();
}
end = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
std::cout << out[100] << "append string const char* = " << std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(end - begin).count() << "[µs]" << std::endl;
prepareForBecnhmark();
begin = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
for(size_t i=0; i<iterations; i++) {
out.append(tag_values[stack_tag.top()]);
stack_tag.pop();
}
end = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
std::cout << out[100] << "append string string_view= " << std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(end - begin).count() << "[µs]" << std::endl;
// Add to array
prepareForBecnhmark();
std::array<const char*, iterations> cca;
begin = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
for(size_t i=0; i<iterations; i++) {
cca[i] = tag_value[stack_tag.top()];
stack_tag.pop();
}
end = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
std::cout << "fill array const char* = " << std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(end - begin).count() << "[µs]" << std::endl;
prepareForBecnhmark();
std::array<std::string_view, iterations> ccsv;
begin = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
for(size_t i=0; i<iterations; i++) {
ccsv[i] = tag_values[stack_tag.top()];
stack_tag.pop();
}
end = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
std::cout << "fill array string_view = " << std::chrono::duration_cast<std::chrono::microseconds>(end - begin).count() << "[µs]" << std::endl;
std::cout << ccsv[ccsv.size()-1] << cca[cca.size()-1] << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Results on my machine are:
Aappend string const char* = 97[µs]
Aappend string string_view= 72[µs]
fill array const char* = 35[µs]
fill array string_view = 18[µs]
Godbolt compiler explorer url: https://godbolt.org/z/SMrevx
UPD: Results after more accurate benchmarking (500 runs 300000 iterations):
Caverage append string const char* = 2636[µs]
Caverage append string string_view= 2096[µs]
average fill array const char* = 526[µs]
average fill array string_view = 568[µs]
Godbolt url: https://godbolt.org/z/aU7zL_
So in the second case const char*
is faster as expected. And the first case was explained in the answers.
Simply because with std::string_view
you're passed the length and you don't have to insert a null char whenever you want a new string. char*
has to search for the end everytime and if you want a substring you'll probably have to copy as you'll need a null char at the end of the substring.