What Is the Difference Between ArrayList and LinkedList in Java?

Introduction

In Java, the List interface is part of the java.util package, which represents an ordered collection of elements. Two commonly used implementations of the List interface are ArrayList and LinkedList. Both provide a means of storing and manipulating data in a list, but they differ significantly in terms of their underlying implementations, performance characteristics, and use cases. Understanding these differences is crucial when selecting the right collection type for your application.

This article will explain the key differences between ArrayList and LinkedList, comparing them in terms of performance, memory usage, and specific use cases. We’ll also examine when each data structure is more suitable and provide code examples to demonstrate how both work in practice.

1. Basic Definitions and Implementations

ArrayList and LinkedList are both part of the Java Collections Framework (JCF) and implement the List interface. While they both store ordered data, they have different internal implementations:

ArrayList is backed by a dynamic array. This means that the elements in the list are stored in a contiguous block of memory, and the list size can grow dynamically when the array runs out of space.
LinkedList, on the other hand, is implemented as a doubly-linked list. Each element (node) contains a reference (or link) to both the previous and the next element, creating a chain of elements that can be traversed sequentially.

2. Performance Comparison

One of the most significant factors when choosing between ArrayList and LinkedList is performance. Each structure has its strengths and weaknesses depending on the operations you perform.

2.1. ArrayList Performance

Access Time (Random Access): Since ArrayList uses an array internally, it provides constant time O(1) for accessing elements by index. This is because arrays allow direct access to any element using its index.Example:ArrayList<String> arrayList = new ArrayList<>(); arrayList.add("One"); arrayList.add("Two"); arrayList.add("Three"); // Random access in constant time String element = arrayList.get(1); // O(1) time complexity System.out.println(element); // Output: Two
Insertion and Deletion: When inserting or removing elements in the middle or at the beginning of an ArrayList, it takes O(n) time because it requires shifting the subsequent elements to maintain the array’s contiguous nature.Example:// Inserting at the beginning or middle requires shifting elements arrayList.add(0, "Zero"); // O(n) time complexity
Resizing: ArrayList dynamically resizes when it runs out of capacity. However, resizing involves creating a new, larger array and copying the elements from the old array to the new one. This operation has an amortized time complexity of O(1).

2.2. LinkedList Performance

Access Time (Random Access): LinkedList does not provide efficient random access. To access an element by index, you have to traverse the list from the beginning (or end) until the target element is reached. This takes O(n) time.Example:LinkedList<String> linkedList = new LinkedList<>(); linkedList.add("One"); linkedList.add("Two"); linkedList.add("Three"); // Accessing an element by index takes O(n) time String element = linkedList.get(1); // O(n) time complexity System.out.println(element); // Output: Two
Insertion and Deletion: Inserting or deleting elements in a LinkedList is relatively faster for operations at the beginning or middle of the list. In these cases, the time complexity is O(1), because you only need to adjust the links between the nodes.Example:LinkedList<String> linkedList = new LinkedList<>(); linkedList.add("One"); linkedList.add("Two"); linkedList.add("Three"); // Inserting at the beginning is O(1) linkedList.addFirst("Zero"); // O(1) time complexity
Traversal: Since LinkedList uses a doubly-linked structure, it’s easy to traverse in both directions (forward and backward). However, traversing from one element to another is linear in time, making access by index inefficient for large lists.

3. Memory Usage

Another important consideration is memory usage. Since ArrayList and LinkedList store data differently, their memory requirements vary significantly.

ArrayList: Since ArrayList uses a dynamic array, it stores elements in contiguous memory. However, the array may be resized periodically, leading to some wasted space if the array is significantly larger than the number of elements.Memory Usage:
- An ArrayList only stores the data of the elements, and the overhead is relatively low, with no need for extra pointers or references for each element.
LinkedList: Each element in a LinkedList is represented as a node that contains the data and two references (pointers) to the next and previous nodes in the list. These references result in additional memory overhead. Each node thus uses more memory than an element in an ArrayList.Memory Usage:
- For each element, you require extra memory to store the two pointers (previous and next), which increases the overall memory consumption of a LinkedList compared to an ArrayList.

4. Use Cases: When to Use Each

Choosing between ArrayList and LinkedList depends on your specific use case. Below are some guidelines based on their characteristics:

4.1. When to Use ArrayList

Fast Random Access: If you need fast, constant-time access to elements by index, ArrayList is the better choice. For example, if you’re frequently accessing elements based on their index in a large dataset, ArrayList will perform better.
Less Frequent Insertions/Deletions: If your application primarily reads from the list rather than inserting or deleting elements frequently, ArrayList is ideal because its random access and performance characteristics make it faster for read-heavy use cases.

4.2. When to Use LinkedList

Frequent Insertions/Deletions: If your application involves frequent insertions and deletions, especially at the beginning or middle of the list, LinkedList is more efficient. Since LinkedList can insert and delete elements in constant time when the node is known, it is better suited for cases where the list is being modified frequently.
No Need for Random Access: If your application doesn’t require fast access by index, but needs to perform a lot of sequential operations like adding or removing elements at the beginning or end, LinkedList will work better.

5. Code Example

Let’s compare both classes in a simple example:

import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.LinkedList;

public class ListComparison {
    public static void main(String[] args) {
        // Using ArrayList
        ArrayList<String> arrayList = new ArrayList<>();
        arrayList.add("One");
        arrayList.add("Two");
        arrayList.add("Three");
        
        System.out.println("ArrayList:");
        System.out.println("Element at index 1: " + arrayList.get(1));  // O(1)
        arrayList.add(1, "Zero");  // O(n)
        System.out.println("After insertion at index 1: " + arrayList);

        // Using LinkedList
        LinkedList<String> linkedList = new LinkedList<>();
        linkedList.add("One");
        linkedList.add("Two");
        linkedList.add("Three");
        
        System.out.println("\nLinkedList:");
        System.out.println("Element at index 1: " + linkedList.get(1));  // O(n)
        linkedList.addFirst("Zero");  // O(1)
        System.out.println("After adding element at the beginning: " + linkedList);
    }
}

6. Conclusion

In conclusion, ArrayList and LinkedList each have their advantages and disadvantages. ArrayList is ideal for use cases where fast random access is needed, and LinkedList excels in scenarios that involve frequent insertions and deletions.

Use ArrayList when your application is read-heavy and requires fast access to elements by index.
Use LinkedList when you need frequent insertions or deletions, especially at the beginning or middle of the list, and don’t require fast random access.

Understanding the internal mechanics of each structure will help you make the right choice and optimize performance in your Java applications.

Please follow and like us: