Hello Friends,

I know this question is not specific to .NET CF but as we are in the land of 
less memory, I want to ask this question to all your techies. Its strange 
thought in my mind.

we often hear that its adivsable to use StringBuilder when to many string 
manipulations are there.
For example
Dim str1 as string
str1 &= "Viral"
str1 &= "Thakkar"

ok fine, but what about this case

---Dim str1 as string = "Viral" & "Thakkar"---
Is it still advisable to use stringbuilder, i mean in above case also it 
will create two object.. bla bla bla?

thanks,
Viral

For just 2 or 3 concatenations, a StringBuilder probably is slower than just 
concatenating as you still have to create the object.  When you get to say 4 
or more, then the StringBuilder starts making sense.


-- 

Chris Tacke, Embedded MVP
OpenNETCF Consulting
Managed Code in an Embedded World
www.OpenNETCF.com


"Viral"  wrote in message 
news:47B23140-31E6-4B3E-9840-E351F1F9864B@microsoft.com...

> Hello Friends,
>
> I know this question is not specific to .NET CF but as we are in the land 
> of
> less memory, I want to ask this question to all your techies. Its strange
> thought in my mind.
>
> we often hear that its adivsable to use StringBuilder when to many string
> manipulations are there.
> For example
> Dim str1 as string
> str1 &= "Viral"
> str1 &= "Thakkar"
>
> ok fine, but what about this case
>
> ---Dim str1 as string = "Viral" & "Thakkar"---
> Is it still advisable to use stringbuilder, i mean in above case also it
> will create two object.. bla bla bla?
>
> thanks,
> Viral
>
>
>
> 

I was once at a contract that was very concerned with performance and we ran 
a test using string concat and string builder.  We found that for operations 
of up to 10 concats it was more efficient to use string concats but more than 
about 10 string builder was more efficient.  We also found that when we were 
memory constrained that  preallocating the string buffer was always more 
memory efficient.

Rick D.
Contractor

"<ctacke/>" wrote:


> For just 2 or 3 concatenations, a StringBuilder probably is slower than just 
> concatenating as you still have to create the object.  When you get to say 4 
> or more, then the StringBuilder starts making sense.
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> Chris Tacke, Embedded MVP
> OpenNETCF Consulting
> Managed Code in an Embedded World
> www.OpenNETCF.com
> 
> 
> "Viral"  wrote in message 
> news:47B23140-31E6-4B3E-9840-E351F1F9864B@microsoft.com...
> > Hello Friends,
> >
> > I know this question is not specific to .NET CF but as we are in the land 
> > of
> > less memory, I want to ask this question to all your techies. Its strange
> > thought in my mind.
> >
> > we often hear that its adivsable to use StringBuilder when to many string
> > manipulations are there.
> > For example
> > Dim str1 as string
> > str1 &= "Viral"
> > str1 &= "Thakkar"
> >
> > ok fine, but what about this case
> >
> > ---Dim str1 as string = "Viral" & "Thakkar"---
> > Is it still advisable to use stringbuilder, i mean in above case also it
> > will create two object.. bla bla bla?
> >
> > thanks,
> > Viral
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> 
> 
> 

Did you find out why it was more efficient to use string concats over string 
builder for less than 10 operations?

Preallocating memory has always been more efficient. Historically this is 
the way it always was with languages such as COBOL and Fortran. It's only 
newer languages (OO mainly) that had recently (20 yrs or so) has introduced 
variable length types, I think Smalltalk 67 was the first? In the bad old 
days you had to specify how much memory you needed and allocate it.
-- 
Simon Hart
http://simonrhart.blogspot.com


"dbgrick" wrote:


> I was once at a contract that was very concerned with performance and we ran 
> a test using string concat and string builder.  We found that for operations 
> of up to 10 concats it was more efficient to use string concats but more than 
> about 10 string builder was more efficient.  We also found that when we were 
> memory constrained that  preallocating the string buffer was always more 
> memory efficient.
> 
> Rick D.
> Contractor
> 
> "<ctacke/>" wrote:
> 
> > For just 2 or 3 concatenations, a StringBuilder probably is slower than just 
> > concatenating as you still have to create the object.  When you get to say 4 
> > or more, then the StringBuilder starts making sense.
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> > Chris Tacke, Embedded MVP
> > OpenNETCF Consulting
> > Managed Code in an Embedded World
> > www.OpenNETCF.com
> > 
> > 
> > "Viral"  wrote in message 
> > news:47B23140-31E6-4B3E-9840-E351F1F9864B@microsoft.com...
> > > Hello Friends,
> > >
> > > I know this question is not specific to .NET CF but as we are in the land 
> > > of
> > > less memory, I want to ask this question to all your techies. Its strange
> > > thought in my mind.
> > >
> > > we often hear that its adivsable to use StringBuilder when to many string
> > > manipulations are there.
> > > For example
> > > Dim str1 as string
> > > str1 &= "Viral"
> > > str1 &= "Thakkar"
> > >
> > > ok fine, but what about this case
> > >
> > > ---Dim str1 as string = "Viral" & "Thakkar"---
> > > Is it still advisable to use stringbuilder, i mean in above case also it
> > > will create two object.. bla bla bla?
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > Viral
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> >