Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I thought so too, but appending to a single string does even worse than reduce(:+):

  add 2  0.390000   0.000000   0.390000 (  0.390529)
  +=  2  0.540000   0.000000   0.540000 (  0.537450)

  add 3  0.530000   0.000000   0.530000 (  0.534131)
  +=  3  0.760000   0.000000   0.760000 (  0.752280)

  add 4  0.660000   0.000000   0.660000 (  0.668154)
  +=  4  0.960000   0.000000   0.960000 (  0.954727)
Code: https://gist.github.com/1562994



+= is not append

  str += append_str
is the equivalent to:

  str.dup << append_str
That is, it copies the string and then appends to the copy. Benchmarking the speed of a true append is difficult because in order to preserve the original string in the benchmark you must dup it anyhow (done here outside of the bench.report block). However, the bigger the strings get, the more pronounced the advantage of appending is.

                user     system      total        real
  add  2      0.260000   0.000000   0.260000 (  0.263414)
  join 2      0.320000   0.000000   0.320000 (  0.325341)
  append 2    0.230000   0.010000   0.240000 (  0.235669)

  add  3      0.500000   0.000000   0.500000 (  0.497219)
  join 3      0.840000   0.020000   0.860000 (  0.866401)
  append 3    0.260000   0.010000   0.270000 (  0.268676)

  add  4      0.360000   0.040000   0.400000 (  0.397778)
  join 4      0.970000   0.030000   1.000000 (  0.997321)
  append 4    0.280000   0.000000   0.280000 (  0.281020)

  add  5      0.460000   0.000000   0.460000 (  0.454780)
  join 5      0.910000   0.030000   0.940000 (  0.946600)
  append 5    0.330000   0.000000   0.330000 (  0.336214)
Code: https://gist.github.com/1563290




Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: