Scala-Seq 的大小和长度有什么区别？

一个序列的大小和长度有什么区别? 何时使用一个序列和何时使用另一个序列？

scala> var a :Seq[String] = Seq("one", "two")
a: Seq[String] = List(one, two)


scala> a.size
res6: Int = 2


scala> a.length
res7: Int = 2

一样吗？

谢谢

56656 次浏览

小开

最佳答案

Nothing. In the Seq doc, at the size method it is clearly stated: "The size of this sequence, equivalent to length.".

小开

Nothing, one delegates to the other. See SeqLike trait.

  /** The size of this $coll, equivalent to `length`.
*
*  $willNotTerminateInf
*/
override def size = length

小开

size is defined in GenTraversableOnce, whereas length is defined in GenSeqLike, so length only exists for Seqs, whereas size exists for all Traversables. For Seqs, however, as was already pointed out, size simply delegates to length (which probably means that, after inlining, you will get identical bytecode).

小开

In a Seq they are the same, as others have mentioned. However, for information, this is what IntelliJ warns on a scala.Array:

Replace .size with .length on arrays and strings

Inspection info: This inspection reports array.size and string.size calls. While such calls are legitimate, they require an additional implicit conversion to SeqLike to be made. A common use case would be calling length on arrays and strings may provide significant advantages.

小开

I did an experiment, using Scala version 2.12.8, and a million item list. Upon the first use, length() is 7 or 8 times faster than size(). But on the 2nd try on the same list, size() is about the same speed as length().

However, after some time, presumably the cache is gone, size() is slow() by 7 or 8 times again.

This shows that length() is preferred for sequences. It's not just another name for size().