Comparing Performance: Loops vs. Iterators
To determine whether to use loops or iterators, you need to know which
implementation is faster: the version of the search
function with an explicit
for
loop or the version with iterators.
We ran a benchmark by loading the entire contents of The Adventures of
Sherlock Holmes by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle into a String
and looking for the
word the in the contents. Here are the results of the benchmark on the
version of search
using the for
loop and the version using iterators:
test bench_search_for ... bench: 19,620,300 ns/iter (+/- 915,700)
test bench_search_iter ... bench: 19,234,900 ns/iter (+/- 657,200)
The iterator version was slightly faster! We won't explain the benchmark code here, because the point is not to prove that the two versions are equivalent but to get a general sense of how these two implementations compare performance-wise.
For a more comprehensive benchmark, you should check using various texts of
various sizes as the contents
, different words and words of different lengths
as the query
, and all kinds of other variations. The point is this:
iterators, although a high-level abstraction, get compiled down to roughly the
same code as if you'd written the lower-level code yourself. Iterators are one
of Rust's zero-cost abstractions, by which we mean using the abstraction
imposes no additional runtime overhead. This is analogous to how Bjarne
Stroustrup, the original designer and implementor of C++, defines
zero-overhead in "Foundations of C++" (2012):
In general, C++ implementations obey the zero-overhead principle: What you don't use, you don't pay for. And further: What you do use, you couldn't hand code any better.
As another example, the following code is taken from an audio decoder. The
decoding algorithm uses the linear prediction mathematical operation to
estimate future values based on a linear function of the previous samples. This
code uses an iterator chain to do some math on three variables in scope: a
buffer
slice of data, an array of 12 coefficients
, and an amount by which
to shift data in qlp_shift
. We've declared the variables within this example
but not given them any values; although this code doesn't have much meaning
outside of its context, it's still a concise, real-world example of how Rust
translates high-level ideas to low-level code.
let buffer: &mut [i32];
let coefficients: [i64; 12];
let qlp_shift: i16;
for i in 12..buffer.len() {
let prediction = coefficients.iter()
.zip(&buffer[i - 12..i])
.map(|(&c, &s)| c * s as i64)
.sum::<i64>() >> qlp_shift;
let delta = buffer[i];
buffer[i] = prediction as i32 + delta;
}
To calculate the value of prediction
, this code iterates through each of the
12 values in coefficients
and uses the zip
method to pair the coefficient
values with the previous 12 values in buffer
. Then, for each pair, we
multiply the values together, sum all the results, and shift the bits in the
sum qlp_shift
bits to the right.
Calculations in applications like audio decoders often prioritize performance
most highly. Here, we're creating an iterator, using two adaptors, and then
consuming the value. What assembly code would this Rust code compile to? Well,
as of this writing, it compiles down to the same assembly you'd write by hand.
There's no loop at all corresponding to the iteration over the values in
coefficients
: Rust knows that there are 12 iterations, so it "unrolls" the
loop. Unrolling is an optimization that removes the overhead of the loop
controlling code and instead generates repetitive code for each iteration of
the loop.
All of the coefficients get stored in registers, which means accessing the values is very fast. There are no bounds checks on the array access at runtime. All these optimizations that Rust is able to apply make the resulting code extremely efficient. Now that you know this, you can use iterators and closures without fear! They make code seem like it's higher level but don't impose a runtime performance penalty for doing so.
Summary
Closures and iterators are Rust features inspired by functional programming language ideas. They contribute to Rust's capability to clearly express high-level ideas at low-level performance. The implementations of closures and iterators are such that runtime performance is not affected. This is part of Rust's goal to strive to provide zero-cost abstractions.
Now that we've improved the expressiveness of our I/O project, let's look at
some more features of cargo
that will help us share the project with the
world.