所以我想知道定期递归调用函数的更好方法（就堆栈增长和性能而言）是什么？
例如，假设我想每 200 毫秒读取一次文件内容。我有以下两种方法，想知道它们是否有什么不同？
方法 1：使用普通的 ols setTimeout 而不使用 process.nextTick
var fs = require('fs');
(function loop() {
// Print to time to indicate something is happening
console.log(new Date().toString());
// Read a 51MB file
fs.readFile('./testfile', function (err, data) {
if (err) console.log(err);
});
// Call the same function again
setTimeout(function () {
loop();
}, 200);
})();
方法2：在setTimeout内调用process.nextTick
var fs = require('fs');
(function loop() {
// Print to time to indicate something is happening
console.log(new Date().toString());
// Read a 51MB file
fs.readFile('./testfile', function (err, data) {
if (err) console.log(err);
});
// Call the same function again
setTimeout(function () {
process.nextTick(function () {
loop();
});
}, 200);
})();
我想知道的是在 setTimeout 中添加 process.nextTick 有帮助吗？调用 process.nextTick 内的函数是否会减轻堆栈使用量？
以下简化示例中没有递归：
function test()
{
console.trace();
setTimeout(test, 1000);
}
test();
输出（注意堆栈没有增长）
Trace
at test (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Object.<anonymous> (/private/tmp/rec.js:7:1)
at Module._compile (module.js:449:26)
at Object..js (module.js:467:10)
at Module.load (module.js:356:32)
at Function._load (module.js:312:12)
at module.js:487:10
at EventEmitter._tickCallback (node.js:238:9)
Trace
at Object.test [as _onTimeout] (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Timer.ontimeout (timers.js:101:19)
Trace
at Object.test [as _onTimeout] (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Timer.ontimeout (timers.js:101:19)
Trace
at Object.test [as _onTimeout] (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Timer.ontimeout (timers.js:101:19)
Trace
at Object.test [as _onTimeout] (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Timer.ontimeout (timers.js:101:19)
Trace
at Object.test [as _onTimeout] (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Timer.ontimeout (timers.js:101:19)
Trace
at Object.test [as _onTimeout] (/private/tmp/rec.js:3:12)
at Timer.ontimeout (timers.js:101:19)
本文内容由网友自发贡献，版权归原作者所有，本站不承担相应法律责任。如您发现有涉嫌抄袭侵权的内容，请联系:hwhale#tublm.com(使用前将#替换为@)
