Struct faster than class?

[wackyphill]

If you have a function that basically creates an object/struct that
holds data only in a function and wish to return the object/struct from
the function which is faster a class object or struct?

I would have thought class object since it can be passed back as an
object reference instead of copying an entire struct, but I've read
things that make me question if structs are in fact faster.

What's the truth?

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

<wa********@yah oo.com> wrote:

If you have a function that basically creates an object/struct that
holds data only in a function and wish to return the object/struct from
the function which is faster a class object or struct?

I would have thought class object since it can be passed back as an
object reference instead of copying an entire struct, but I've read
things that make me question if structs are in fact faster.

What's the truth?

The return would be faster with a class. However, you'd need to create
the instance on the heap to start with, which would be more expensive
than creating the struct on the stack.

However, you should really ask whether you want value semantics or
reference semantics. The "default" answer should be to create a class.
It's very rarely a good idea to create a struct. There are all kinds of
surprising (if you're not careful) bits of behaviour otherwise -
particularly for mutable structs.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[wackyphill]

Well, for an e-commerce site where each product could be a struct or
class it seems reasonable to not want to incur overhead if not
necessary.

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

<wa********@yah oo.com> wrote:

Well, for an e-commerce site where each product could be a struct or
class it seems reasonable to not want to incur overhead if not
necessary.

Not until you've actually got a performance problem. Micro-optimisation
kills readability and elegant design if you let it. Work out the
simplest way to do it, paying attention to *macro*-optimisation (in
terms of transactions, web service chattiness etc), and then see
whether that performs well enough. If it doesn't, find the bottleneck
and optimise *that*.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

Jon Skeet [C# MVP] <sk***@pobox.co m> wrote:

<wa********@yah oo.com> wrote:

Well, for an e-commerce site where each product could be a struct or
class it seems reasonable to not want to incur overhead if not
necessary.

Not until you've actually got a performance problem. Micro-optimisation
kills readability and elegant design if you let it. Work out the
simplest way to do it, paying attention to *macro*-optimisation (in
terms of transactions, web service chattiness etc), and then see
whether that performs well enough. If it doesn't, find the bottleneck
and optimise *that*.

Sorry, I should have included a link to Ian Griffith's excellent
mailing list post (now on his blog):

http://www.interact-sw.co.uk/iangblo...1/09/profiling

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[wackyphill]

Ya know, I'd rather you not answer the question than tell me something
completely other than what I was asking about.

1st off a struct is not in the least complex.
2nd I asked specifically about speed. Not about design. It's a speed
question, I don't care what you think is a good use of design time.

It was a specific speed question, between a class object and a struct,
nothing else.
I don't get why people want to try and tell other people that there
questions aren't the right ones.

[Jon Skeet [C# MVP]]

<wa********@yah oo.com> wrote:

Ya know, I'd rather you not answer the question than tell me something
completely other than what I was asking about.
Sorry, I'll give you a full refund.
1st off a struct is not in the least complex.
That statement may well come back to bite you, especially if you make
your structs mutable. How well do you know the rules about when a
struct's variable is definitely initialised? How about what the effects
of unboxing are? Why is:

object o = GetSomethingFro mSomewhere();
((SomeClass)o). Value = 5;

valid but

object o = GetSomethingFro mSomewhere();
((SomeStruct)o) .Value = 5;

isn't?
2nd I asked specifically about speed. Not about design. It's a speed
question, I don't care what you think is a good use of design time.
That's an unfortunate attitude, but never mind.
It was a specific speed question, between a class object and a struct,
nothing else.
I don't get why people want to try and tell other people that there
questions aren't the right ones.

Because it's proven to be useful so many times in the past.

For instance, someone asked a while ago what the equivalent of some
Delphi code was in C#. What they really *wanted* was some C# code which
accomplished the same result - and the best solution to that was
actually to use regular expressions, rather than to transcribe the
Delphi into C#. Do you really think the best answer would have been to
give the transcription?

Why would you *not* want to know about other things which should affect
your decision, beyond the thing you happen to have thought of to start
with? Do you trust yourself to think of everything and have more
experience of the issues than everyone on the newsgroup? I know I don't
when I ask a question.

--
Jon Skeet - <sk***@pobox.co m>
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet Blog: http://www.msmvps.com/jon.skeet
If replying to the group, please do not mail me too

[sdbillsfan]

Jon,
Based solely on your postings to this and other newsgroups I
think it would be a terrible understatement to say you add a lot to the
development community but I'm not sure if I'm more impressed with your
extensive contribution or your ability to handle posters like this in a
calm and professional manner. I can only guess that you've worked with
(and cleaned up after) this sort of tunnel-visioned/short-sighted
developer before and take comfort in the fact that as long as his kind
exist, there will be a great demand for knowledgeable and skilled
engineers.
Just wanted you to know that your work here is greatly
appreciated by most of us; please keep it up.

Happy Holidays,
Will

[seani]

On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:03:13 -0800, wackyphill wrote:

Ya know, I'd rather you not answer the question than tell me something
completely other than what I was asking about.

Ya know, he *did* address your question. You're just ignorant to
understand that he did.
1st off a struct is not in the least complex. 2nd I asked specifically
about speed. Not about design. It's a speed question, I don't care what
you think is a good use of design time.

It was a specific speed question, between a class object and a struct,
nothing else.
I don't get why people want to try and tell other people that there
questions aren't the right ones.

Can you post your full name and address so I can ensure that I never
accidentally employ you?

[wackyphill]

>Why would you *not* want to know about other things which should affect

your decision, beyond the thing you happen to have thought of to start
with? Do you trust yourself to think of everything and have more
experience of the issues than everyone on the newsgroup? I know I don't
when I ask a question.
Because it was not a design decision, simply a curiosity of how the
run-time handles things.
For example, would a struct be more efficient if it was < 16 bytes and
an object be more efficient if > 16 bytes.
I'm curious about such things, despite their admitted irrelevance in
99% of most modern scenarios if all you're concerned w/ is getting
things to work.From a knowing how things actually work perspective (if that interests

you as it does me) it is a valid question as it was worded IMO.