Which is optimal ?

Question

Is declaring a variable inside a loop is good or declaring on the fly optimal in Java.Also is there any performance cost involved while declaring inside the loop?

eg.

Option 1: Outside the Loop

List list = new ArrayList();
int value;

//populate list
for(int i = 0 ; i < list.size(); i++) {
  value = list.get(i);
  System.out.println(“value is ”+ value);
}

Option 2: Inside the Loop

List list = new ArrayList();

//populate list
for(int i = 0; i < list.size(); i++) {
  int value = list.get(i);
  System.out.println(“value is ”+ value);
}

Answer 1

In Clean Code, Robert C. Martin advises Java coders to declare variables as close as possible to where they are to be used. Variables should not have greater scope than necessary. Having the declaration of a variable close to where it's used helps give the reader type and initialization information. Don't concern yourself too much with performance because the JVM is pretty good at optimizing these things. Instead focus on readability.

BTW: If you're using Java 5 or greater, you can significantly trim up your code example using the following new-for-Java-5 features:

• foreach construct
• generics
• autoboxing

I've refactored your example to use the aforementioned new features.

List<Integer> list = new ArrayList<Integer>();

// populate list

for (int value : list) {
    System.out.println("value is " + value);
}

Answer 2

Well, if you are worrying about optimizing that code - I'm not sure about how Java evaluates for loops, but having the list.size() being called inside the loop declaration maybe less efficient than outide the loop (and setting it to a varable listLength perhaps). I'm pretty sure that method is quicker in JavaScript. The reason it might be more efficient is that having the size function call inside the for loop means it would have to go call the function each time it runs the test to see if the loop is finished, instead of testing against a static value.

Answer 3

The most optimal way to traverse a list is to use an Iterator.

for (Iterator iter=list.iterator(); iter.hasNext();) {
  System.out.println(iter.next());
}

Answer 4

It should make no difference which way you implement from a performance perspective.

But more importantly, you should not be wasting your time micro-optimizing your code like this ... UNLESS you've profiled your entire application and determined that this fragment is a performance bottleneck. (And if you've done that, you are in a good position to see if there is really any difference between the two versions of the code. But I would be very, surprised if there was ...)

Answer 5

While your example is a hypothetical, most likely not real world application, the simple answer is that you don't need a variable at all in this scenario. There is no reason to allocate the memory. Simply put it's wasted memory that becomes cannon fodder in the JVM. You've already allocated memory to store the value in a List, why duplicate it in another variable?

The scope of the variable's use will often dictate where it should be declared. For instance:

Connection conn = null;
try {
    conn.open();
} catch (Exception e) {
    e.printStackTrace();
} finally {
    conn.close();
}

The other answers do a good job of exposing the other pitfalls of the example you provided. There are better ways to iterate through a list, whether it's with an actual Iterator, or a foreach loop, and generics will help eliminate the need to create a primitive duplicate.

Answer 6

In simple cases like this, there is most likely no difference and compiler produces exactly the same code (assuming you do not set the initial value when declaring the variable).

In more complex cases and longer functions, declaring local variable inside the loop or other block is likely to be more efficient. This shortens the lifetime of the variable thus making it easier for compiler to optimize the code. When a variable does not exist outside the block, the register used to store the variable can be used for other purposes.

This, of course, depends on the compiler implementation. I don't know about Java, but at least some C compiler manufacturers have given this recommendation in their documentation.

As for readability, my opinion is that in short functions it is better to declare all variables at the beginning where they can be easily found. In very long functions (which should be avoided anyway), it may be better to declare the variable inside a block (which just happens to be more efficient, too).

Answer 7

Besides the useful suggestions given by others, please do keep in mind one thing:

never optimize early. If you really think your code is slow and might need improvement, then use a profiler for your code to spot where the bottlenecks are, and only then do refactor them. Learn where the mistake was. Do not repeat mistake next time.

In your case I would say that, depending on the java VM version, your performance (guess what) might vary. Out of experience I'd not declare a variable within a loop; an int will certainly be optimized out by the compiler and re-use the same memory address, and the extra computational cost might be negligible.

But.

If you were declaring an object inside a loop, then things will be different. What if your object, when created, does an I/O write? A network DNS lookup? You might not know/care. So, best practice is declare it ouside.

Also, do not mix up performance with best practice. They might lead you into dangerous territory.

Answer 8

The Java compiler determines how many "slots" it needs in the stack frame based on how you use local variables. This number is determined based on the maximum number of active locals at any given point in the method.

If your code is only

int value;
for (...) {...}

or

for (...) {
   int value;
   ...
}

there's only one slot needed on the runtime stack; the same slot can be reused inside the loop regardless of how many times the loop runs.

However, if you do something after the loop that requires another slot:

int value;
for (...) {...}
int anotherValue;

or

for (...) {
   int value;
   ...
}
int anotherValue;

we'll see a difference - the first version requires two slots, as both variables are active after the loop; in the second example, only one slot is required, as we can reuse the slot from "value" for "anotherValue" after the loop.

Note: the compiler can be smarter about optimizations depending on how the data is actually used, but this simple example is meant to demonstrate that there can be a difference in stack frame allocation.