I suppose the question I have is two-fold, so I will number them for clarity:

1) Am I correct in assuming that the LinkedList class is more efficient than the Vector class?

2) When working with a List (whether it be ArrayList, LinkedList, etc...) is it better to use an Iterator object to traverse the list, or to use a loop and accessor methods?

The reason I ask is because I am working on a game that the GameObject class contains a list of Component objects. when the GameObject is updated, it traverses the list, calling the update method of each component. At the moment, I am using a LinkedList and traversing it by means of an Iterator object, but I am scared that bottlenecks can arise due to the nature of Iterators.

1) Am I correct in assuming that the LinkedList class is more efficient than the Vector class?

No, not at all, they're both efficient but for different kinds of operation. A LinkedList is more efficient as insertion and removal in the middle, for example, but not as efficient memory-wise or for sequential iteration (which is kind of a consequence of its memory layout) and are very inefficient at random-access lookup. A Vector is also synchronized (for multi-threading) by default, whereas a LinkedList isn't.

In general you ought to 'know' when a LinkedList is appropriate and when a Vector is appropriate. If you don't know then a good rule of thumb is to default to using an ArrayList (like a Vector but not synchronized).

2) When working with a List (whether it be ArrayList, LinkedList, etc...) is it better to use an Iterator object to traverse the list, or to use a loop and accessor methods?[/quote]
Neither and both - It depends on what it is you're doing. If you just want to iterate over the contents of a collection then use the special for loop:

for (Component c : myListOfComponents) {
doSomethingTo(c);
}

The reason I ask is because I am working on a game that the GameObject class contains a list of Component objects. when the GameObject is updated, it traverses the list, calling the update method of each component. At the moment, I am using a LinkedList and traversing it by means of an Iterator object, but I am scared that bottlenecks can arise due to the nature of Iterators.[/quote]
If you're mainly traversing you may prefer to use an ArrayList instead, they support rapid traversal more efficiently than a LinkedList.

[quote name='jonbonazza' timestamp='1319316797' post='4875434']1) Am I correct in assuming that the LinkedList class is more efficient than the Vector class?

No, not at all, they're both efficient but for different kinds of operation. A LinkedList is more efficient as insertion and removal in the middle, for example, but not as efficient memory-wise or for sequential iteration (which is kind of a consequence of its memory layout) and are very inefficient at random-access lookup. A Vector is also synchronized (for multi-threading) by default, whereas a LinkedList isn't.

In general you ought to 'know' when a LinkedList is appropriate and when a Vector is appropriate. If you don't know then a good rule of thumb is to default to using an ArrayList (like a Vector but not synchronized).

2) When working with a List (whether it be ArrayList, LinkedList, etc...) is it better to use an Iterator object to traverse the list, or to use a loop and accessor methods?[/quote]
Neither and both - It depends on what it is you're doing. If you just want to iterate over the contents of a collection then use the special for loop:

for (Component c : myListOfComponents) {
doSomethingTo(c);
}

The reason I ask is because I am working on a game that the GameObject class contains a list of Component objects. when the GameObject is updated, it traverses the list, calling the update method of each component. At the moment, I am using a LinkedList and traversing it by means of an Iterator object, but I am scared that bottlenecks can arise due to the nature of Iterators.[/quote]
If you're mainly traversing you may prefer to use an ArrayList instead, they support rapid traversal more efficiently than a LinkedList.

[/quote]

I hadn't considered the special for loop. I have more experience in C/C++ than java, so I sometimes forget that that is an option.

Thanks for the input, both of you.