The performance should not depend on either way, because anyone implementing fwrite would multiply size and count to determine how much I/O to do.
This is exemplified by FreeBSD's libc implementation of fwrite.c
, which in its entirety reads (include directives elided):
/*
* Write `count' objects (each size `size') from memory to the given file.
* Return the number of whole objects written.
*/
size_t
fwrite(buf, size, count, fp)
const void * __restrict buf;
size_t size, count;
FILE * __restrict fp;
{
size_t n;
struct __suio uio;
struct __siov iov;
/*
* ANSI and SUSv2 require a return value of 0 if size or count are 0.
*/
if ((count == 0) || (size == 0))
return (0);
/*
* Check for integer overflow. As an optimization, first check that
* at least one of {count, size} is at least 2^16, since if both
* values are less than that, their product can't possible overflow
* (size_t is always at least 32 bits on FreeBSD).
*/
if (((count | size) > 0xFFFF) &&
(count > SIZE_MAX / size)) {
errno = EINVAL;
fp->_flags |= __SERR;
return (0);
}
n = count * size;
iov.iov_base = (void *)buf;
uio.uio_resid = iov.iov_len = n;
uio.uio_iov = &iov;
uio.uio_iovcnt = 1;
FLOCKFILE(fp);
ORIENT(fp, -1);
/*
* The usual case is success (__sfvwrite returns 0);
* skip the divide if this happens, since divides are
* generally slow and since this occurs whenever size==0.
*/
if (__sfvwrite(fp, &uio) != 0)
count = (n - uio.uio_resid) / size;
FUNLOCKFILE(fp);
return (count);
}
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…