Is there a neater way for getting the number of digits in an int than this method?
int numDigits = String.valueOf(1000).length();
Curious, I tried to benchmark it ...
import org.junit.Test;
import static org.junit.Assert.*;
public class TestStack1306727 {
@Test
public void bench(){
int number=1000;
int a= String.valueOf(number).length();
int b= 1 + (int)Math.floor(Math.log10(number));
assertEquals(a,b);
int i=0;
int s=0;
long startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(i=0, s=0; i< 100000000; i++){
a= String.valueOf(number).length();
s+=a;
}
long stopTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
long runTime = stopTime - startTime;
System.out.println("Run time 1: " + runTime);
System.out.println("s: "+s);
startTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
for(i=0,s=0; i< 100000000; i++){
b= number==0?1:(1 + (int)Math.floor(Math.log10(Math.abs(number))));
s+=b;
}
stopTime = System.currentTimeMillis();
runTime = stopTime - startTime;
System.out.println("Run time 2: " + runTime);
System.out.println("s: "+s);
assertEquals(a,b);
}
}
the results are :
Run time 1: 6765 s: 400000000 Run time 2: 6000 s: 400000000
Now I am left to wonder if my benchmark actually means something but I do get consistent results (variations within a ms) over multiple runs of the benchmark itself ... :) It looks like it's useless to try and optimize this...
edit: following ptomli's comment, I replaced 'number' by 'i' in the code above and got the following results over 5 runs of the bench :
Run time 1: 11500 s: 788888890 Run time 2: 8547 s: 788888890 Run time 1: 11485 s: 788888890 Run time 2: 8547 s: 788888890 Run time 1: 11469 s: 788888890 Run time 2: 8547 s: 788888890 Run time 1: 11500 s: 788888890 Run time 2: 8547 s: 788888890 Run time 1: 11484 s: 788888890 Run time 2: 8547 s: 788888890