lundi 29 décembre 2014

Use std::swap between vectors or vector::swap?

Given two std::vector v1, v2.

I was wondering what are the benefits to use std::swap(v1, v2) over v1.swap(v2).


I have implemented a simple test code (I am not sure it is pertinent) regarding performance point of view :



#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <random>
#include <chrono>
#include <algorithm>

#define N 100000

template<typename TimeT = std::chrono::microseconds>
struct Timer
{
template<typename F, typename ...Args>
static typename TimeT::rep exec(F func, Args&&... args)
{
auto start = std::chrono::steady_clock::now();
func(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
auto duration = std::chrono::duration_cast<TimeT>(std::chrono::steady_clock::now() - start);
return duration.count();
}
};

void test_std_swap(std::vector<double>& v1, std::vector<double>& v2)
{
for (int i = 0; i < N; i ++)
{
std::swap(v1,v2);
std::swap(v2,v1);
}
}

void test_swap_vector(std::vector<double>& v1, std::vector<double>& v2)
{
for (int i = 0; i < N; i ++)
{
v1.swap(v2);
v2.swap(v1);
}
}

int main()
{
std::vector<double> A(1000);
std::generate( A.begin(), A.end(), [&]() { return std::rand(); } );
std::vector<double> B(1000);
std::generate( B.begin(), B.end(), [&]() { return std::rand(); } );
std::cout << Timer<>::exec<void(std::vector<double>& v1, std::vector<double>& v2)>(test_std_swap, A, B) << std::endl;
std::cout << Timer<>::exec<void(std::vector<double>& v1, std::vector<double>& v2)>(test_swap_vector, A, B) << std::endl;
std::cout << Timer<>::exec<void(std::vector<double>& v1, std::vector<double>& v2)>(test_std_swap, A, B) << std::endl;
std::cout << Timer<>::exec<void(std::vector<double>& v1, std::vector<double>& v2)>(test_swap_vector, A, B) << std::endl;
}


According to outputs it seems that vector::swap seems faster without optimization -O0. Output is (in microseconds) :



20292
16246
16400
13898


And with -O3 there is no revelant difference.



752
752
752
760

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire