I'm relatively new to Java, having taken my first class in it little under a year ago, and I have a question regarding efficiency. I know that
Random rng = new Random();
int num = rng.nextInt(101);
System.out.println("Random number is: " + num); //Example 1
and
Random rng = new Random();
System.out.println("Random number is: " + rng.nextInt(101)); //Example 2
are equivalent. However my question is which is faster to calculate? In my mind, the first example stores a variable, which takes up RAM. The second example doesn't store anything, but has to calculate a lot more things whilst printing than the first example.
In my computing classes, I was taught that information coming from the CPU's internal registers is a lot faster than information coming from the RAM. Does that mean example 2 is technically more efficient for not having stored the number variable before printing it?
I'm of course assuming I will not need the randomly generated number at another point in the program.
Thank you for any and all help :)
Kind regards
Any sane compiler will be able to perform such compile time optimizations to reduce extra lines of code which are there to improve readability.That is not specific to Java(where JIT takes the optimizations to the next level)
Since the number is going to be converted to a String for the concatenation, it will probably be put in memory on the stack anyways.
Related
I have 2 strings in an array. I want there to be a 10% chance of one and 90% chance to select the other. Right now I am using:
Random random = new Random();
int x = random.nextInt(100 - 1) + 1;
if (x < 10) {
string = stringArray(0);
} else {
string = stringArray(1);
}
Is this the best way of accomplishing this or is there a better method?
I know it's typically a bad idea to submit a stack overflow response without submitting code, but I really challenge this question of " the best way." People ask this all the time and, while there are established design patterns in software worth knowing, this question almost always can be answered by "it depends."
For example, your pattern looks fine (I might add some comments). You might get a minuscule performance increase by using 1 - 10 instead of 1 - 100, but the things you need to ask yourself are as follows :
If I get hit by a bus, is the person who is going to be working on the application going to know what I was trying to do?
If it isn't intuitive, I should write a comment. Then I should ask myself, "Can I change this code so that a comment isn't necessary?"
Is there an existing library that solves this problem? If so, is it FOSS approved (if applicable) / can I use it?
What is the size of this codebase eventually going to be? Am I making a full program with microservices, a DAO, DTO, Controller, View, and different layers for validation?
Is there an existing convention to solve my problem (either at my company or in general), or is it unique enough that I can take my own spin on it?
Does this follow the DRY principle?
I'm in (apparently) a very small camp on stack overflow that doesn't always believe in universal "bests" for solving code problems. Just remember, programming is only as hard as the problem you're trying to solve.
EDIT
Since people asked, I'd do it like this:
/*
* #author DaveCat
* #version 1.0
* #since 2019-03-9
* Convenience method that calculates 90% odds of A and 10% odds of B.
*
*/
public static String[] calculatesNinetyPercent()
{
Random random = new Random();
int x = random.nextInt(10 - 1 ) + 1
//Option A
if(x <= 9) {
return stringArray(0);
}
else
{
//Option B
return stringArray(1);
}
}
As an aside, one of the common mistakes junior devs make in enterprise level development is excessive comments.This has a javadoc, which is probably overkill, but I'm assuming this is a convenience method you're using in a greater program.
Edit (again)
You guys keep confusing me. This is how you randomly generate between 2 given numbers in Java
One alternative is to use a random float value between 0..1 and comparing it to the probability of the event. If the random value is less than the probability, then the event occurs.
In this specific example, set x to a random float and compare it to 0.1
I like this method because it can be used for probabilities other than percent integers.
I have a variable that gets read and updated thousands of times a second. It needs to be reset regularly. But "half" the time, the value is already the reset value. Is it a good idea to check the value first (to see if it needs resetting) before resetting (a write operaion), or I should just reset it regardless? The main goal is to optimize the code for performance.
To illustrate:
Random r = new Random();
int val = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
for (int i=0; i<100000000; i++) {
if (i % 2 == 0)
val = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
else
val = r.nextInt();
if (val != Integer.MAX_VALUE) //skip check?
val = Integer.MAX_VALUE;
}
I tried to use the above program to test the 2 scenarios (by un/commenting the 2nd "if" line), but any difference is masked by the natural variance of the run duration time.
Thanks.
Don't check it.
It's more execution steps = more cycles = more time.
As an aside, you are breaking one of the basic software golden rules: "Don't optimise early". Unless you have hard evidence that this piece if code is a performance problem, you shouldn't be looking at it. (Note that doesn't mean you code without performance in mind, you still follow normal best practice, but you don't add any special code whose only purpose is "performance related")
The check has no actual performance impact. We'd be talking about a single clock cycle or something, which is usually not relevant in a Java program (as hard-core number crunching usually isn't done in Java).
Instead, base the decision on readability. Think of the maintainer who's going to change this piece of code five years on.
In the case of your example, using my rationale, I would skip the check.
Most likely the JIT will optimise the code away because it doesn't do anything.
Rather than worrying about performance, it is usually better to worry about what it
simpler to understand
cleaner to implement
In both cases, you might remove the code as it doesn't do anything useful and it could make the code faster as well.
Even if it did make the code a little slower it would be very small compared to the cost of calling r.nextInt() which is not cheap.
I have a Double that I want to knock the extra digits after the decimal place off of (I'm not too concerned about accuracy but feel free to mention it in your answer) prior to conversion into a String.
I was wondering whether it would be better to cast to an int or to use a DecimalFormat and call format(..) . Also, is it then more efficient to specify String.valueOf() or leave it as it is and let the compiler figure it out?
Sorry if I sound a bit ignorant, I'm genuinely curious to learn more of the technical details.
For reference, i'm drawing text to and android canvas:
c.drawText("FPS: " + String.valueOf((int)lastFps), xPos, yPos, paint);
Casting will probably be more efficient. This is implemented as native code while using a method will have to go through the java code. Also it's much more readable.
For the string.valueof, I expect the performance to be strictly the same. I find it more readable to just do "string" + intValue than "string" + String.valueof(intValue)
I made a program that used System.nanoTime() to calculate the execution time of these two methods:
public static void cast() {
for (int i=0; i<1000000; i++) {
int x= (int)Math.random();
}
}
public static void format() {
for (int i=0; i< 1000000; i++) {
DecimalFormat df = new DecimalFormat("#");
df.format(Math.random());
}
}
Here are the respective results:
80984944
6048075593
Granted my tests probably aren't perfect examples. I'm just using math.random(), which generates a number that will always cast to 0, which might affect results. However, these results do make sense - casting should be cheap, since it likely doesn't operate on the bits at all - the JVM just treats the bits differently.
Edit: If I pull out the instantiation of the formatter for the second example, the program runs in 3155165182ns. If I multiply the random numbers by Integer.MAX_VALUE in both cases (with the instantiation pulled out), the results are: 82100170 and 4174558079. Looks like casting is the way to go.
This is a job for Math.floor().
Generally speaking, function/method calls come at the cost of performance overhead. My vote is that typecasting would be faster, but as #Zefiryn suggested, the best way is to create a loop and do each action a multitude of times and measure the performance with a timer.
I'm not sure about the efficiency of either, but here's a third option that could be interesting to compare:
String.valueOf(doubleValue).substring(0, endInt)
which would give a set number of characters rather than decimals/numbers, and would skip the typecasting but make two function calls instead.
EDIT: Was too curious so I tried running each option:
integerNumberFormat.format(number)
String.valueOf(doubleValue).substring(0, endInt)
String.valueOf((int)doubleValue)
10^6 cycles with the results being ~800 ms, ~300 ms and ~40 ms, respectively. I guess my results won't be immediately translatable to your situation but they could give a hint that the last one is indeed, as the previous posters suggested, the fastest one.
I have updated this question(found last question not clear, if you want to refer to it check out the reversion history). The current answers so far do not work because I failed to explain my question clearly(sorry, second attempt).
Goal:
Trying to take a set of numbers(pos or neg, thus needs bounds to limit growth of specific variable) and find their linear combinations that can be used to get to a specific sum. For example, to get to a sum of 10 using [2,4,5] we get:
5*2 + 0*4 + 0*5 = 10
3*2 + 1*4 + 0*5 = 10
1*2 + 2*4 + 0*5 = 10
0*2 + 0*4 + 2*5 = 10
How can I create an algo that is scalable for large number of variables and target_sums? I can write the code on my own if an algo is given, but if there's a library avail, I'm fine with any library but prefer to use java.
One idea would be to break out of the loop once you set T[z][i] to true, since you are only basically modifying T[z][i] here, and if it does become true, it won't ever be modified again.
for i = 1 to k
for z = 0 to sum:
for j = z-x_i to 0:
if(T[j][i-1]):
T[z][i]=true;
break;
EDIT2: Additionally, if I am getting it right, T[z][i] depends on the array T[z-x_i..0][i-1]. T[z+1][i] depends on T[z+1-x_i..0][i-1]. So once you know if T[z][i] is true, you only need to check one additional element (T[z+1-x_i][i-1]) to know if T[z+1][i-1] will be true.
Let's say you represent the fact whether T[z][i] was updated by a variable changed. Then, you can simply say that T[z][i] = changed && T[z-1][i]. So you should be done in two loops instead of three. This should make it much faster.
Now, to scale it - Now that T[z,i] depends only on T[z-1,i] and T[z-1-x_i,i-1], so to populate T[z,i], you do not need to wait until the whole (i-1)th column is populated. You can start working on T[z,i] as soon as the required values are populated. I can't implement it without knowing the details, but you can try this approach.
I take it this is something like unbounded knapsack? You can dispense with the loop over c entirely.
for i = 1 to k
for z = 0 to sum
T[z][i] = z >= x_i cand (T[z - x_i][i - 1] or T[z - x_i][i])
Based on the original example data you gave (linear combination of terms) and your answer to my question in the comments section (there are bounds), would a brute force approach not work?
c0x0 + c1x1 + c2x2 +...+ cnxn = SUM
I'm guessing I'm missing something important but here it is anyway:
Brute Force Divide and Conquer:
main controller generates coefficients for say, half of the terms (or however many may make sense)
it then sends each partial set of fixed coefficients to a work queue
a worker picks up a partial set of fixed coefficients and proceeds to brute force its own way through the remaining combinations
it doesn't use much memory at all as it works sequentially on each valid set of coefficients
could be optimized to ignore equivalent combinations and probably many other ways
Pseudocode for Multiprocessing
class Controller
work_queue = Queue
solution_queue = Queue
solution_sets = []
create x number of workers with access to work_queue and solution_queue
#say for 2000 terms:
for partial_set in coefficient_generator(start_term=0, end_term=999):
if worker_available(): #generate just in time
push partial set onto work_queue
while solution_queue:
add any solutions to solution_sets
#there is an efficient way to do this type of polling but I forget
class Worker
while true: #actually stops when a stop work token is received
get partial_set from the work queue
for remaining_set in coefficient_generator(start_term=1000, end_term=1999):
combine the two sets (partial_set.extend(remaining_set))
if is_solution(full_set):
push full_set onto the solution queue
This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.
Closed 11 years ago.
I am reading a file that has 10,000 int values and then trying to store these in an array. There is an exception thrown which says that the array value is too large.
I was wondering, rather than write this array out in to a variable, could i possibly just keep it in memory and read it from there. Would this be a suitable way of solving this problem?
edit:
After more examination it appears that the error being thrown is a "code to large for try statement" error. I am reading each array element and appending it to a string, maybe this is what is causing the error?
You could use an ArrayList instead - but an array should be fine with 10,000 values. Can you post more detail? Code, full stack trace etc. Theoretically it should be fine with Integer.MAX_VALUE elements (a LOT more than 10k), but of course you may run out of memory first!
In terms of "just keep it in memory and read it from there", well variables are just kept in memory, so whether you use an array or a list (or any other data structure) you'll always be reading it from memory!
EDIT: Based on your additional explanation then it's not a problem with the array size at all, it's a problem with you generating 10,000 lines of code to put in a single block, which is too many and thus it complains. Alter your code to generate code that uses a loop instead and all should be well, however many elements you have in there (up to Integer.MAX_VALUE of course.)
An array of 10,000 int values is about 40KB.
You could try to reduce the memory used further however I suspect this is not your problem.
Can you give us the actual error message? An array value is only too large if its a long e.g. say you used File.length()/4 to determine the size of the array, in which case you need to cast it to an int
It is strange that you cannot create 10000 elements long array. I believe that your problem is not the array length but the value of particular array element. Anyway if you need bigger arrays use Lists instead. Specifically java.util.LinkedList.
Your problem is that you are writing each array or String assignment out in full, something like this:
array[0] = 0;
array[1] = 1;
array[2] = 2;
// all the way up to 9999!
or this:
String s = "";
s += array[0];
s += array[1];
s += array[2];
// all the way up to 9999!
instead of in a loop. So you generate more code than Java will allow in a method.
This results in a compilation error as you describe:
$ javac Test.java
Test.java:7: code too large for try statement
try {
^
Test.java:4: code too large
public static void main(String[] args) {
^
2 errors
Following from discussion in comments, the code that you say is producing this compiler error does not have an enormous number of lines. Something doesn't make sense - the error you report does not line up with the code you say is causing it. At this late stage I strongly recommend that you post some code, and the error so that others can try to understand what might be causing this.
(Also, your question isn't likely to get much attention because you have accepted an answer. You might want to reconsider that if your question is not in fact answered.)
An array of 10,000 ints isn't very big at all. I can't think why you would have a problem keeping the data in memory (ie assigned to a variable).
I find it odd that 10,000 ints takes up too much memory. It could be that other stuff if eating up your memory. Have you tried increasing the available memory to Java? (i.e.-Xmx512m). If this is not possible, you can always try to use shorts or bytes if the numbers are small enough.
The array will take just as much space as chunk of memory (like c does).
This is a known bug in the JVM. It prohibits you from creating an array of integers with size 10,000 (and also 16,384 on Mac OS X). It has to do with the way in which Java translates the byte code into machine code. Changing the size of the array to 10,001 will solve the problem.