英文:
Golang append memory allocation VS. STL push_back memory allocation
问题
我比较了Go语言的append
函数和STL的vector.push_back
函数,并发现它们使用了不同的内存分配策略,这让我感到困惑。以下是代码示例:
// CPP STL 代码
void getAlloc() {
vector<double> arr;
int s = 9999999;
int precap = arr.capacity();
for (int i=0; i<s; i++) {
if (precap < i) {
arr.push_back(rand() % 12580 * 1.0);
precap = arr.capacity();
printf("%d %p\n", precap, &arr[0]);
} else {
arr.push_back(rand() % 12580 * 1.0);
}
}
printf("\n");
return;
}
// Golang 代码
func getAlloc() {
arr := []float64{}
size := 9999999
pre := cap(arr)
for i:=0; i<size; i++ {
if pre < i {
arr = append(arr, rand.NormFloat64())
pre = cap(arr)
log.Printf("%d %p\n", pre, &arr)
} else {
arr = append(arr, rand.NormFloat64())
}
}
return;
}
但是,无论扩展大小如何增加,内存地址都保持不变,这让我非常困惑。顺便说一下,这两种实现(STL和Go)的内存分配策略是不同的,我指的是扩展大小。这是上述代码的简化输出[大小和第一个元素的地址]:
Golang CPP STL
2 0xc0800386c0 2 004B19C0
4 0xc0800386c0 4 004AE9B8
8 0xc0800386c0 6 004B29E0
16 0xc0800386c0 9 004B2A18
32 0xc0800386c0 13 004B2A68
64 0xc0800386c0 19 004B2AD8
128 0xc0800386c0 28 004B29E0
256 0xc0800386c0 42 004B2AC8
512 0xc0800386c0 63 004B2C20
1024 0xc0800386c0 94 004B2E20
1280 0xc0800386c0 141 004B3118
1600 0xc0800386c0 211 004B29E0
2000 0xc0800386c0 316 004B3080
2500 0xc0800386c0 474 004B3A68
3125 0xc0800386c0 711 004B5FD0
3906 0xc0800386c0 1066 004B7610
4882 0xc0800386c0 1599 004B9768
6102 0xc0800386c0 2398 004BC968
7627 0xc0800386c0 3597 004C1460
9533 0xc0800386c0 5395 004B5FD0
11916 0xc0800386c0 8092 004C0870
14895 0xc0800386c0 12138 004D0558
18618 0xc0800386c0 18207 004E80B0
23272 0xc0800386c0 27310 0050B9B0
29090 0xc0800386c0 40965 004B5FD0
36362 0xc0800386c0 61447 00590048
45452 0xc0800386c0 92170 003B0020
56815 0xc0800386c0 138255 00690020
71018 0xc0800386c0 207382 007A0020
....
更新:
有关Golang的内存分配策略,请参阅评论。
对于STL,策略取决于具体的实现。请参阅此帖子以获取更多信息。
英文:
I compared the Go append
function and the STL vector.push_back
and found that different memory allocation strategy which confused me. The code is as follow:
// CPP STL code
void getAlloc() {
vector<double> arr;
int s = 9999999;
int precap = arr.capacity();
for (int i=0; i<s; i++) {
if (precap < i) {
arr.push_back(rand() % 12580 * 1.0);
precap = arr.capacity();
printf("%d %p\n", precap, &arr[0]);
} else {
arr.push_back(rand() % 12580 * 1.0);
}
}
printf("\n");
return;
}
// Golang code
func getAlloc() {
arr := []float64{}
size := 9999999
pre := cap(arr)
for i:=0; i<size; i++ {
if pre < i {
arr = append(arr, rand.NormFloat64())
pre = cap(arr)
log.Printf("%d %p\n", pre, &arr)
} else {
arr = append(arr, rand.NormFloat64())
}
}
return;
}
But the memory address is invarient to the increment of size expanding, this really confused me.
By the way, the memory allocation strategy is different in this two implemetation (STL VS. Go), I mean the expanding size. Is there any advantage or disadvantage? Here is the simplified output of code above[size and first element address]:
Golang CPP STL
2 0xc0800386c0 2 004B19C0
4 0xc0800386c0 4 004AE9B8
8 0xc0800386c0 6 004B29E0
16 0xc0800386c0 9 004B2A18
32 0xc0800386c0 13 004B2A68
64 0xc0800386c0 19 004B2AD8
128 0xc0800386c0 28 004B29E0
256 0xc0800386c0 42 004B2AC8
512 0xc0800386c0 63 004B2C20
1024 0xc0800386c0 94 004B2E20
1280 0xc0800386c0 141 004B3118
1600 0xc0800386c0 211 004B29E0
2000 0xc0800386c0 316 004B3080
2500 0xc0800386c0 474 004B3A68
3125 0xc0800386c0 711 004B5FD0
3906 0xc0800386c0 1066 004B7610
4882 0xc0800386c0 1599 004B9768
6102 0xc0800386c0 2398 004BC968
7627 0xc0800386c0 3597 004C1460
9533 0xc0800386c0 5395 004B5FD0
11916 0xc0800386c0 8092 004C0870
14895 0xc0800386c0 12138 004D0558
18618 0xc0800386c0 18207 004E80B0
23272 0xc0800386c0 27310 0050B9B0
29090 0xc0800386c0 40965 004B5FD0
36362 0xc0800386c0 61447 00590048
45452 0xc0800386c0 92170 003B0020
56815 0xc0800386c0 138255 00690020
71018 0xc0800386c0 207382 007A0020
....
UPDATE:
See comments for Golang memory allocation strategy.
For STL, the strategy depends on the implementation. See this post for further information.
答案1
得分: 2
你的Go和C++代码片段并不等价。在C++函数中,你打印的是向量中第一个元素的地址,而在Go示例中,你打印的是切片本身的地址。
就像C++的std::vector
一样,Go的切片是一个小的数据类型,它持有一个指向底层数组的指针来保存数据。这个数据结构在整个函数中具有相同的地址。如果你想要获取切片中第一个元素的地址,你可以使用与C++相同的语法:&arr[0]
。
英文:
Your Go and C++ code fragments are not equivalent. In the C++ function, you are printing the address of the first element in the vector, while in the Go example you are printing the address of the slice itself.
Like a C++ std::vector
, a Go slice is a small data type that holds a pointer to an underlying array that holds the data. That data structure has the same address throughout the function. If you want the address of the first element in the slice, you can use the same syntax as in C++: &arr[0]
.
答案2
得分: 0
你得到的是切片头的指针,而不是实际的底层数组。你可以将切片头想象成一个类似结构体的东西,如下所示:
type SliceHeader struct {
len,cap int
backingArray unsafe.Pointer
}
当你执行追加操作并且底层数组被重新分配时,指针 backingArray
可能会被改变(不一定,但很可能)。然而,持有长度、容量和指向底层数组的指针的结构体的位置并不会改变,它仍然在你声明它的地方的栈上。尝试打印 &arr[0]
而不是 &arr
,你应该会看到更接近你期望的行为。
顺便说一下,这与 std::vector
的行为几乎相同。将切片视为更接近于 vector
而不是一个神奇的动态数组。
英文:
You're getting the pointer to the slice header, not the actual backing array. You can think of the slice header as a struct like
type SliceHeader struct {
len,cap int
backingArray unsafe.Pointer
}
When you append and the backing array is reallocated, the pointer backingArray
will likely be changed (not necessarily, but probably). However, the location of the struct holding the length, cap, and pointer to the backing array doesn't change -- it's still on the stack right where you declared it. Try printing &arr[0]
instead of &arr
and you should see behavior closer to what you expect.
This is pretty much the same behavior as std::vector
, incidentally. Think of a slice as closer to a vector
than a magic dynamic array.
通过集体智慧和协作来改善编程学习和解决问题的方式。致力于成为全球开发者共同参与的知识库,让每个人都能够通过互相帮助和分享经验来进步。
评论