This program:
#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
#include <string>
int main(int argc, const char *argv[])
{
using ::std::cerr;
using ::std::cout;
using ::std::endl;
if (argc < 2 || argc > 3) {
cerr << "Usage: " << argv[0] << " [<count>] <message>\n";
return 1;
}
unsigned long count = 10000;
if (argc > 2) {
char *endptr = 0;
count = ::std::strtoul(argv[1], &endptr, 10);
if ((argv[1][0] == '\0') || (*endptr != '\0')) {
cerr << "Usage: " << argv[0] << " [<count>] <message>\n";
return 1;
}
}
const ::std::string msg((argc < 3) ? argv[1] : argv[2]);
for (unsigned long i = 0; i < count; ++i) {
cout << i << ": " << msg << '\n';
}
return 0;
}
when timed like so:
$ time ./joe 10000000 fred >/dev/null
real 0m15.410s
user 0m10.551s
sys 0m0.166s
takes 15.4 seconds of real time to execute. Replace the output line with this: cout << i << ": " << msg << endl;
and you end up with something like this:
$ time ./joe 10000000 fred >/dev/null
real 0m39.115s
user 0m16.482s
sys 0m15.803s
As you can see, the time to run more than doubles, and the program goes from spending minimal time in the OS to spending nearly half of it's time in the OS.
Both versions of the program have identical output, and are guaranteed by the standard to have identical output on every platform.
Given this, why do people persist in using endl
as a synonym for '\n'?
Edit: In case it isn't obvious, this question is intended to be a leading question and is here for instructional purposes. I know why the performance penalty exists.
Some other differences between endl and [&n&] are: endl is manipulator while n is character. endl doesn’t occupy any memory whereas n is character so It occupy 1 byte memory.
being a character can be stored in a string (will still convey its specific meaning of line break) while endl is a keyword and would not specify any meaning when stored in a string. cout<<“ ”; it is right but cout<<“endl”; is wrong. We can use both in C and C++ but, endl is only supported by C++ and not the C language.
We cannot write endl in between double quotation while we can write \n in between double quotation like. cout<<“\n”; it is right but cout<<“endl”; is wrong. We can use \n both in C and C++ but, endl is only supported by C++ and not the C language. Reference: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/213907/c-stdendl-vs-n.
I'm not certain. Inserting std::endl
into the output stream is defined as being equivalent to inserting .widen('\n')
and then calling flush()
and yet many programmers persist in using std::endl
even when there is no cause to flush, for example they go on to immediately output something else.
My assumption is that it comes from an incorrect belief that it is somehow a more portable because it doesn't explicitly use a specific newline character. This is incorrect as \n
must always be mapped to the system's correct newline sequence for non-binary files by the stream library.
Afaik, endl also flushes the stream, which may be the cause of the performance penalty.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With