I thought that if the $v don’t change [foreach($a as $v)], the real copy will not happen because of copy on write, but why it is fast when pass by reference?
影响不在$v上,而在$a,庞大的阵列上.您可以将其作为值传递或作为函数的引用传递.在函数内部,然后是值(test1)或引用(test2).
你有两个代码(代码1和代码2).
代码1:正在使用foreach.使用foreach,您有两个选择:迭代值或引用(Example).迭代值时,迭代将在值的副本上完成.如果迭代引用,则不会执行任何复制.
当您在test2中使用引用时,它会更快.不需要复制值.但是在test1中,您将数组作为值传递,数组将被复制.
代码2:正在使用.因为这里什么也没做.在这两种情况下.您可以从数组中访问变量和读取值.无论是引用还是副本(这要归功于PHP中的写入优化副本),这几乎是一样的.
您现在可能想知道,为什么代码2存在差异.差异不是因为for而是因为计数.如果你传递一个引用计数PHP内部创建它的副本,因为它计数需要一个副本,而不是一个引用.
我也编译了一组测试.但我更具体地将代码放入测试函数中.
>空白 – 调用函数有什么区别?
>伯爵 – 伯爵会有所作为吗?
>对于 – foronly(不计数)会发生什么?
> Foreach – Just foreach – 甚至打破第一个元素.
每个测试都有两个版本,一个名为_copy(将数组作为副本传递给函数),另一个名为_ref(将数组作为参考传递).
并不总是这些微基准测试告诉你真相,但如果你能够隔离特定点,你可以很好地做出有根据的猜测,例如,不是因为计数产生了影响:
function blank_copy($a){
}
function blank_ref(&$a){
}
function foreach_copy($a){
foreach($a as $v) break;
}
function foreach_ref(&$a){
foreach($a as $v) break;
}
function count_copy($a){
$cnt = count($a);
}
function count_ref(&$a){
$cnt = count($a);
}
function for_copy($a){
for($i=0;$i<100000;$i++)
$a[$i];
}
function for_ref(&$a){
for($i=0;$i<100000;$i++)
$a[$i];
}
$tests = array('blank_copy', 'blank_ref', 'foreach_copy', 'foreach_ref', 'count_copy', 'count_ref', 'for_copy', 'for_ref');
$x = array_fill(0, 100000, 'xxxxx');
$count = count($x);
$runs = 10;
ob_start();
for($i=0;$i<10;$i++)
{
shuffle($tests);
foreach($tests as $test)
{
$begin = microtime(true);
for($r=0;$r
$test($x);
$end = microtime(true);
$result = $end - $begin;
printf("* %'.-16s: %f\n", $test, $result);
}
}
$buffer = explode("\n", ob_get_clean());
sort($buffer);
echo implode("\n", $buffer);
输出:
* blank_copy......: 0.000011
* blank_copy......: 0.000011
* blank_copy......: 0.000012
* blank_copy......: 0.000012
* blank_copy......: 0.000012
* blank_copy......: 0.000015
* blank_copy......: 0.000015
* blank_copy......: 0.000015
* blank_copy......: 0.000015
* blank_copy......: 0.000020
* blank_ref.......: 0.000012
* blank_ref.......: 0.000012
* blank_ref.......: 0.000014
* blank_ref.......: 0.000014
* blank_ref.......: 0.000014
* blank_ref.......: 0.000014
* blank_ref.......: 0.000015
* blank_ref.......: 0.000015
* blank_ref.......: 0.000015
* blank_ref.......: 0.000015
* count_copy......: 0.000020
* count_copy......: 0.000022
* count_copy......: 0.000022
* count_copy......: 0.000023
* count_copy......: 0.000024
* count_copy......: 0.000025
* count_copy......: 0.000025
* count_copy......: 0.000025
* count_copy......: 0.000026
* count_copy......: 0.000031
* count_ref.......: 0.113634
* count_ref.......: 0.114165
* count_ref.......: 0.114390
* count_ref.......: 0.114878
* count_ref.......: 0.114923
* count_ref.......: 0.115106
* count_ref.......: 0.116698
* count_ref.......: 0.118077
* count_ref.......: 0.118197
* count_ref.......: 0.123201
* for_copy........: 0.190837
* for_copy........: 0.191883
* for_copy........: 0.193080
* for_copy........: 0.194947
* for_copy........: 0.195045
* for_copy........: 0.195944
* for_copy........: 0.198314
* for_copy........: 0.198878
* for_copy........: 0.200016
* for_copy........: 0.227953
* for_ref.........: 0.191918
* for_ref.........: 0.194227
* for_ref.........: 0.195952
* for_ref.........: 0.196045
* for_ref.........: 0.197392
* for_ref.........: 0.197730
* for_ref.........: 0.201936
* for_ref.........: 0.207102
* for_ref.........: 0.208017
* for_ref.........: 0.217156
* foreach_copy....: 0.111968
* foreach_copy....: 0.113224
* foreach_copy....: 0.113574
* foreach_copy....: 0.113575
* foreach_copy....: 0.113879
* foreach_copy....: 0.113959
* foreach_copy....: 0.114194
* foreach_copy....: 0.114450
* foreach_copy....: 0.114610
* foreach_copy....: 0.118020
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000015
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000016
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000016
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000016
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000018
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000019
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000019
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000019
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000019
* foreach_ref.....: 0.000020