CODEWITHSUNDEEP
performancego
hey
hey

Reputation: 7819

When should you initialize a new variable and when you should not?

I'm looking at the code examples sql.query and i'm a bit confused by the way the variables are initialized. As far as I understand the var keyword initialize the variable but if you already have a such variable it's better to 'reuse' it instead to reinitialize it. I'm aware that I might have misunderstood the golang specs so I hope this question would help me (and perhaps other folks) get it right.

  rows, err := db.Query("SELECT name FROM users WHERE age=?", age)
    if err != nil {
            log.Fatal(err)
    }
    defer rows.Close()
    for rows.Next() {
            var name string
            if err := rows.Scan(&name); err != nil {
                    log.Fatal(err)
            }
            fmt.Printf("%s is %d\n", name, age)
    }
    if err := rows.Err(); err != nil {
            log.Fatal(err)
    }

Why is the "name" variable initialized within the loop and not outside the loop ? (see below). Isn't it less performant to reinitialize it on each loop ? 

//how I would do this
  rows, err := db.Query("SELECT name FROM users WHERE age=?", age)
    if err != nil {
            log.Fatal(err)
    }
    defer rows.Close()
    var name string //outside the loop
    for rows.Next() {

            if err := rows.Scan(&name); err != nil {
                    log.Fatal(err)
            }
            fmt.Printf("%s is %d\n", name, age)
    }
    if err := rows.Err(); err != nil {
            log.Fatal(err)
    }

or even better use a pointer

      rows, err := db.Query("SELECT name FROM users WHERE age=?", age)
        if err != nil {
                log.Fatal(err)
        }
        defer rows.Close()
        name := new(string) //pointer outside the loop
        for rows.Next() {

                if err := rows.Scan(name); err != nil {
                        log.Fatal(err)
                }
                fmt.Printf("%s is %d\n", name, age)
        }
        if err := rows.Err(); err != nil {
                log.Fatal(err)
        }

Upvotes: 3

Views: 663

Answers (1)

James Henstridge
James Henstridge

Reputation: 43899

Unless you have determined that the allocation is a performance bottleneck, I wouldn't consider such a premature optimisation. After all, it might not even make a difference, so it is best to err on the side of readability/maintainability.

In general, I'd suggest using the smallest scope for your variables that makes sense. If they are stack allocated, then they will be quite cheap -- assuming space is available, it probably just involves initialising the variable to zero or its initial value. Stack allocated variables scoped within a loop will probably end up with the same memory location each time through the loop too, so there isn't much to be gained from moving them out.

With that said, it isn't always obvious when a variable will be allocated on the stack. If the compiler decides that the pointer passed to row.Scan could possibly be retained past the function call (that is, it escapes), then name will be allocated on the heap even though it has been defined with var.

Similarly if the escape analysis determines that the variable doesn't escape, the version that creates the string variable with new may decide to place it on the stack.

Upvotes: 3

Related Questions