If you're looping through an array, it shouldn't matter - the enhanced for loop uses array accesses anyway.
For example, consider this code:
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for (String x : args)
{
System.out.println(x);
}
}
When decompiled with javap -c Test we get (for the main method):
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
Code:
0: aload_0
1: astore_1
2: aload_1
3: arraylength
4: istore_2
5: iconst_0
6: istore_3
7: iload_3
8: iload_2
9: if_icmpge 31
12: aload_1
13: iload_3
14: aaload
15: astore 4
17: getstatic #2; //Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
20: aload 4
22: invokevirtual #3; //Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/String;)V
25: iinc 3, 1
28: goto 7
31: return
Now change it to use an explicit array access:
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for (int i = 0; i < args.length; i++)
{
System.out.println(args[i]);
}
}
This decompiles to:
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
Code:
0: iconst_0
1: istore_1
2: iload_1
3: aload_0
4: arraylength
5: if_icmpge 23
8: getstatic #2; //Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
11: aload_0
12: iload_1
13: aaload
14: invokevirtual #3; //Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/String;)V
17: iinc 1, 1
20: goto 2
23: return
There's a bit more setup code in the enhanced for loop, but they're basically doing the same thing. No iterators are involved. Furthermore, I'd expect them to get JITted to even more similar code.
Suggestion: if you really think it might make a significant difference (which it would only ever do if the body of the loop is absolutely miniscule) then you should benchmark it with your real application. That's the only situation which matters.
Answer from Jon Skeet on Stack OverflowVideos
If you're looping through an array, it shouldn't matter - the enhanced for loop uses array accesses anyway.
For example, consider this code:
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for (String x : args)
{
System.out.println(x);
}
}
When decompiled with javap -c Test we get (for the main method):
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
Code:
0: aload_0
1: astore_1
2: aload_1
3: arraylength
4: istore_2
5: iconst_0
6: istore_3
7: iload_3
8: iload_2
9: if_icmpge 31
12: aload_1
13: iload_3
14: aaload
15: astore 4
17: getstatic #2; //Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
20: aload 4
22: invokevirtual #3; //Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/String;)V
25: iinc 3, 1
28: goto 7
31: return
Now change it to use an explicit array access:
public static void main(String[] args)
{
for (int i = 0; i < args.length; i++)
{
System.out.println(args[i]);
}
}
This decompiles to:
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
Code:
0: iconst_0
1: istore_1
2: iload_1
3: aload_0
4: arraylength
5: if_icmpge 23
8: getstatic #2; //Field java/lang/System.out:Ljava/io/PrintStream;
11: aload_0
12: iload_1
13: aaload
14: invokevirtual #3; //Method java/io/PrintStream.println:(Ljava/lang/String;)V
17: iinc 1, 1
20: goto 2
23: return
There's a bit more setup code in the enhanced for loop, but they're basically doing the same thing. No iterators are involved. Furthermore, I'd expect them to get JITted to even more similar code.
Suggestion: if you really think it might make a significant difference (which it would only ever do if the body of the loop is absolutely miniscule) then you should benchmark it with your real application. That's the only situation which matters.
This falls squarely in the arena of micro-optimization. It really doesn't matter. Stylistically I always prefer the second because it's more concise, unless you need the loop counter for something else. And that's far more important than this kind of micro-optimization: readability.
That being said, For an ArrayList there won't be much difference but a LinkedList will be much more efficient with the second.
Found the answer
public class App {
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
Car car = new Car();
Bicycle bicycle = new Bicycle();
Van van = new Van();
Object[] racers = {car, bicycle, van};
for(Object x : racers) {
System.out.println(x.getClass());
((Vehicle) x).go(); // this is the only change I made
}
}
}
The following would have worked
Vehicle[] racers = {car, bicycle, van};
for (Vehicle x : racers) { ... x.go();
Dynamic detection does works too. You could use the modern Stream<?>.
Object[] racers = {car, bicycle, van};
Arrays.stream(racers)
.filter(r -> r instanceOf(Vehicle)
.map(Vehicle.class::cast)
.forEach(r -> {
r.go(); ...
};
The better question might be: Why wouldn't you want to use a FOR loop to iterate through an array? There are many ways to iterate through an Array or a collection and there is no law that states you have to use the FOR loop. In a lot of cases, it's simply the best to use for speed, ease of use, and readability. And yet, in other cases it is not:
The Array:
int[] array = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10};
Display Array with the typical for loop:
for (int i = 0; i < array.length; i++) {
System.out.println(array[i]);
}
Display Array with the enhanced for loop:
for(Integer num : array) {
System.out.println(num);
}
Display Array with the do/while loop:
int i = 0;
do {
System.out.println(array[i++]);
} while (i < array.length);
Display Array with the while loop:
int j = 0;
while (j < array.length) {
System.out.println(array[j++]);
}
Display Array through Recursive Iteration:
iterateArray(array, 0); // 0 is the start index.
// The 'iterateArray()' method:
private static int iterateArray(int[] array, int index) {
System.out.println(array[index]);
index++;
if (index == array.length) {
return 0;
}
return iterateArray(array,index);
}
Display Array using Arrays.stream() (Java8+):
Arrays.stream(array).forEach(e->System.out.print(e + System.lineSeparator()));
Display Array using IntStream (Java8+):
IntStream.range(0, array.length).mapToObj(index -> array[index]).forEach(System.out::println);
Choose your desired weapon....
Considering you have an array like :
int[] array = {1,2,4,5,6};
You can use stream to iterate over it, apart from printing you can perform lot many thing over this array.
Arrays.stream(array).forEach(System.out::println);
Similarly you can do lot many action over collections as well:
List<String> myList = new ArrayList<>(); List
myList.add("A");
myList.add("B");
Stream.of(myList).forEach(System.out::println);
myList.forEach(System.out::println);
You can do an enhanced for loop (for java 5 and higher) for iteration on array's elements:
String[] elements = {"a", "a", "a", "a"};
for (String s: elements) {
//Do your stuff here
System.out.println(s);
}
String[] elements = { "a", "a", "a", "a" };
for( int i = 0; i < elements.length - 1; i++)
{
String element = elements[i];
String nextElement = elements[i+1];
}
Note that in this case, elements.length is 4, so you want to iterate from [0,2] to get elements 0,1, 1,2 and 2,3.
Since atleast Java 1.5.0 (Java 5) the code can be cleaned up a bit. Arrays and anything that implements Iterator (e.g. Collections) can be looped as such:
public static boolean inArray(int[] array, int check) {
for (int o : array){
if (o == check) {
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
In Java 8 you can also do something like:
// import java.util.stream.IntStream;
public static boolean inArray(int[] array, int check) {
return IntStream.of(array).anyMatch(val -> val == check);
}
Although converting to a stream for this is probably overkill.
You should definitely encapsulate this logic into a method.
There is no benefit to repeating identical code multiple times.
Also, if you place the logic in a method and it changes, you only need to modify your code in one place.
Whether or not you want to use a 3rd party library is an entirely different decision.