.Net 函数调用(C# F#)性能 VS C++

发布于 2024-09-09 00:42:37 字数 2649 浏览 4 评论 0原文

由于 F# 2.0 已成为 VS2010 的一部分,我对 F# 产生了兴趣。我想知道使用它有什么意义。我读了一点,并制定了一个基准来衡量函数调用。 我已经使用了阿克曼函数:)

C#

sealed class Program
{
    public static int ackermann(int m, int n)
    {
        if (m == 0)
            return n + 1;
        if (m > 0 && n == 0)
        {
            return ackermann(m - 1, 1);
        }
        if (m > 0 && n > 0)
        {
            return ackermann(m - 1, ackermann(m, n - 1));
        }
        return 0;
    }

    static void Main(string[] args)
    {

        Stopwatch stopWatch = new Stopwatch();

        stopWatch.Start();
        Console.WriteLine("C# ackermann(3,10) = " + Program.ackermann(3, 10));
        stopWatch.Stop();

        Console.WriteLine("Time required for execution: " + stopWatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
        Console.ReadLine();
    }
}

C++

class Program{
public:
static inline int ackermann(int m, int n)
{
  if(m == 0)
       return n + 1;
  if (m > 0 && n == 0)
  {
      return ackermann(m - 1, 1);
  }
  if (m > 0 && n > 0)
  {
      return ackermann(m - 1, ackermann(m, n - 1));
  }
  return 0;
 }
};

int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
 clock_t start, end;

  start = clock();
 std::cout << "CPP: ackermann(3,10) = " << Program::ackermann(3, 10) << std::endl;
 end = clock();
 std::cout << "Time required for execution: " << (end-start) << " ms." << "\n\n";
 int i;
 std::cin >> i;
 return 0;
}

F#

// Ackermann
let rec ackermann m n  =
  if m = 0 then n + 1
  elif m > 0 && n = 0 then ackermann (m - 1) 1
  elif m > 0 && n > 0 then ackermann (m - 1)  (ackermann m (n - 1))
  else 0

open System.Diagnostics;
let stopWatch = Stopwatch.StartNew()
let x = ackermann 3 10 
stopWatch.Stop();

printfn "F# ackermann(3,10) = %d"  x
printfn "Time required for execution: %f"  stopWatch.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds

Java

public class Main 
{
 public static int ackermann(int m, int n)
 {
 if (m==0) 
   return n + 1;
if (m>0 && n==0)
{
 return ackermann(m - 1,1);
}
if (m>0 && n>0)
{
  return ackermann(m - 1,ackermann(m,n - 1));
 }
 return 0;
}

  public static void main(String[] args)
  { 
   System.out.println(Main.ackermann(3,10));
  }
}

An then
C# = 510ms
C++ = 130ms
F# = 185 毫秒
Java = Stackoverflow :)

如果我们想使用 .Net 并获得更快的执行速度,这是否是 F# 的强大功能(少量代码除外)?我可以优化这些代码(尤其是 F#)吗?

更新。我摆脱了 Console.WriteLine 并在没有调试器的情况下运行 C# 代码:C# = 400ms

Since F# 2.0 has become a part of VS2010 I take an interest in F#. I wondered what's the point of using it. I'd read a bit and I made a benchmark to measure functions calling.
I have used Ackermann's function :)

C#

sealed class Program
{
    public static int ackermann(int m, int n)
    {
        if (m == 0)
            return n + 1;
        if (m > 0 && n == 0)
        {
            return ackermann(m - 1, 1);
        }
        if (m > 0 && n > 0)
        {
            return ackermann(m - 1, ackermann(m, n - 1));
        }
        return 0;
    }

    static void Main(string[] args)
    {

        Stopwatch stopWatch = new Stopwatch();

        stopWatch.Start();
        Console.WriteLine("C# ackermann(3,10) = " + Program.ackermann(3, 10));
        stopWatch.Stop();

        Console.WriteLine("Time required for execution: " + stopWatch.ElapsedMilliseconds + "ms");
        Console.ReadLine();
    }
}

C++

class Program{
public:
static inline int ackermann(int m, int n)
{
  if(m == 0)
       return n + 1;
  if (m > 0 && n == 0)
  {
      return ackermann(m - 1, 1);
  }
  if (m > 0 && n > 0)
  {
      return ackermann(m - 1, ackermann(m, n - 1));
  }
  return 0;
 }
};

int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
 clock_t start, end;

  start = clock();
 std::cout << "CPP: ackermann(3,10) = " << Program::ackermann(3, 10) << std::endl;
 end = clock();
 std::cout << "Time required for execution: " << (end-start) << " ms." << "\n\n";
 int i;
 std::cin >> i;
 return 0;
}

F#

// Ackermann
let rec ackermann m n  =
  if m = 0 then n + 1
  elif m > 0 && n = 0 then ackermann (m - 1) 1
  elif m > 0 && n > 0 then ackermann (m - 1)  (ackermann m (n - 1))
  else 0

open System.Diagnostics;
let stopWatch = Stopwatch.StartNew()
let x = ackermann 3 10 
stopWatch.Stop();

printfn "F# ackermann(3,10) = %d"  x
printfn "Time required for execution: %f"  stopWatch.Elapsed.TotalMilliseconds

Java

public class Main 
{
 public static int ackermann(int m, int n)
 {
 if (m==0) 
   return n + 1;
if (m>0 && n==0)
{
 return ackermann(m - 1,1);
}
if (m>0 && n>0)
{
  return ackermann(m - 1,ackermann(m,n - 1));
 }
 return 0;
}

  public static void main(String[] args)
  { 
   System.out.println(Main.ackermann(3,10));
  }
}

An then
C# = 510ms
c++ = 130ms
F# = 185ms
Java = Stackoverflow :)

Is it the power of F# (except small amount of code) If we want to use .Net and gain a bit faster execution? Can I optimalize any of these codes (especially F#) ?

UPDATE. I got rid off Console.WriteLine and run the C# code without the debugger: C# = 400ms

如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。

扫码二维码加入Web技术交流群

发布评论

需要 登录 才能够评论, 你可以免费 注册 一个本站的账号。

评论(4

手心的海 2024-09-16 00:42:37

我相信在这种情况下,C# 和 F# 之间的差异归功于尾部调用优化。

尾部调用是指在函数中作为“最后一件事”完成的递归调用。在这种情况下,F#实际上并没有生成调用指令,而是将代码编译成循环(因为调用是“最后一件事”,我们可以重用当前堆栈帧,只需跳转到方法的开头) 。

在您的ackermann实现中,其中两个调用是尾部调用,只有一个不是(结果作为参数传递给另一个ackermann调用) )。这意味着 F# 版本实际上调用“call”指令的频率(少得多?)更少。

一般来说,性能概况与 C# 的性能概况大致相同。这里有很多与 F# 与 C# 性能相关的帖子:

I believe that in this case, the difference between C# and F# is thanks to tail-call optimization.

A tail-call is when you have a recursive call that is done as "the last thing" in a function. In this case, F# doesn't actually generate a call instruction, but instead compiles the code into a loop (because the call is the "last thing", we can reuse the current stack frame and just jump to the beginning of the method).

In your implementation of ackermann, two of the calls are tail-calls and only one of them is not (the one where the result is passed as an argument to another ackermann call). This means that the F# version actually invokes a "call" instruction (much?) less often.

In generall, the performance profile is roughly the same as performance profile of C#. There are quite a few posts related to F# vs. C# performance here:

紫罗兰の梦幻 2024-09-16 00:42:37

这是一种与函数调用相关的方法,因为它是减少函数调用的常用方法。

您可以通过记忆(缓存)使这种类型的递归函数运行得更快。您也可以在 C# 中执行此操作 (示例。)我得到了 18 毫秒。

open System.Collections.Generic

let memoize2 f =
    let cache = Dictionary<_, _>()
    fun x y ->
        if cache.ContainsKey (x, y) then 
            cache.[(x, y)]
        else 
            let res = f x y
            cache.[(x, y)] <- res
            res

// Ackermann
let rec ackermann =
    memoize2 (fun m n ->
        if m = 0 then n + 1
        elif m > 0 && n = 0 then ackermann (m - 1) 1
        elif m > 0 && n > 0 then ackermann (m - 1)  (ackermann m (n - 1))
        else 0
    )

This is kind of function calling related since it's a common method to reduce function calls.

You can make this type of recursive function go faster by way of memoization (caching). You can also do this in C# (example.) I got 18ms.

open System.Collections.Generic

let memoize2 f =
    let cache = Dictionary<_, _>()
    fun x y ->
        if cache.ContainsKey (x, y) then 
            cache.[(x, y)]
        else 
            let res = f x y
            cache.[(x, y)] <- res
            res

// Ackermann
let rec ackermann =
    memoize2 (fun m n ->
        if m = 0 then n + 1
        elif m > 0 && n = 0 then ackermann (m - 1) 1
        elif m > 0 && n > 0 then ackermann (m - 1)  (ackermann m (n - 1))
        else 0
    )
寂寞陪衬 2024-09-16 00:42:37

与问题没有直接关系,但值得一提的是:尝试这个版本

let rec ackermann2 m n  =
  match m,n with
  | 0,0 -> 0
  | 0,n -> n+1
  | m,0 -> ackermann2 (m-1) 1
  | m,n -> ackermann2 (m-1) (ackermann2 m (n-1))

在我的电脑(VS2010,F#交互式)上计算 ackermann 3 12 时它比你的版本快了几乎 50%。

我无法完全解释为什么有这样的性能不同之处。我猜想这与 F# 编译器将匹配表达式转换为 switch 语句而不是一系列 if 语句有关。首先进行 (m=0,n=0) 测试也可能有所帮助。

Not directly related to the question, but interesting enough to mention: try this version

let rec ackermann2 m n  =
  match m,n with
  | 0,0 -> 0
  | 0,n -> n+1
  | m,0 -> ackermann2 (m-1) 1
  | m,n -> ackermann2 (m-1) (ackermann2 m (n-1))

On my PC (VS2010, F# interactive) it's almost 50% faster than your version when calculating ackermann 3 12.

I can't quite explain why there's such a performance difference. I guess it has something to do with the F# compiler translating the match expression to a switch statement instead of a series of if statements. Putting the (m=0,n=0) test first may also have helped.

述情 2024-09-16 00:42:37

对于 F#,您可能想尝试 inline 关键字。

此外,正如前面的海报提到的,C# 和 F# 版本由于 Console.WriteLine 语句而有所不同。

For F# you may want to try the inline keyword.

Also, as the previous poster mentioned, the C# and F# versions differ due to the Console.WriteLine statements.

~没有更多了~
我们使用 Cookies 和其他技术来定制您的体验包括您的登录状态等。通过阅读我们的 隐私政策 了解更多相关信息。 单击 接受 或继续使用网站,即表示您同意使用 Cookies 和您的相关数据。
原文