for循环中的++i和i++有区别吗?这仅仅是语法问题吗?
当前回答
下面是一个Java-Sample和字节码,后增量和前增量显示字节码没有区别:
public class PreOrPostIncrement {
static int somethingToIncrement = 0;
public static void main(String[] args) {
final int rounds = 1000;
postIncrement(rounds);
preIncrement(rounds);
}
private static void postIncrement(final int rounds) {
for (int i = 0; i < rounds; i++) {
somethingToIncrement++;
}
}
private static void preIncrement(final int rounds) {
for (int i = 0; i < rounds; ++i) {
++somethingToIncrement;
}
}
}
现在对于字节码(javap -private -c PreOrPostIncrement):
public class PreOrPostIncrement extends java.lang.Object{
static int somethingToIncrement;
static {};
Code:
0: iconst_0
1: putstatic #10; //Field somethingToIncrement:I
4: return
public PreOrPostIncrement();
Code:
0: aload_0
1: invokespecial #15; //Method java/lang/Object."<init>":()V
4: return
public static void main(java.lang.String[]);
Code:
0: sipush 1000
3: istore_1
4: sipush 1000
7: invokestatic #21; //Method postIncrement:(I)V
10: sipush 1000
13: invokestatic #25; //Method preIncrement:(I)V
16: return
private static void postIncrement(int);
Code:
0: iconst_0
1: istore_1
2: goto 16
5: getstatic #10; //Field somethingToIncrement:I
8: iconst_1
9: iadd
10: putstatic #10; //Field somethingToIncrement:I
13: iinc 1, 1
16: iload_1
17: iload_0
18: if_icmplt 5
21: return
private static void preIncrement(int);
Code:
0: iconst_0
1: istore_1
2: goto 16
5: getstatic #10; //Field somethingToIncrement:I
8: iconst_1
9: iadd
10: putstatic #10; //Field somethingToIncrement:I
13: iinc 1, 1
16: iload_1
17: iload_0
18: if_icmplt 5
21: return
}
其他回答
正如这段代码所示(请参阅注释中拆解的MSIL), c# 3编译器在for循环中不区分i++和++i。如果取i++或++i的值,肯定会有区别(这是在visual Studio 2008 / Release Build中编译的):
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;
using System.Text;
namespace PreOrPostIncrement
{
class Program
{
static int SomethingToIncrement;
static void Main(string[] args)
{
PreIncrement(1000);
PostIncrement(1000);
Console.WriteLine("SomethingToIncrement={0}", SomethingToIncrement);
}
static void PreIncrement(int count)
{
/*
.method private hidebysig static void PreIncrement(int32 count) cil managed
{
// Code size 25 (0x19)
.maxstack 2
.locals init ([0] int32 i)
IL_0000: ldc.i4.0
IL_0001: stloc.0
IL_0002: br.s IL_0014
IL_0004: ldsfld int32 PreOrPostIncrement.Program::SomethingToIncrement
IL_0009: ldc.i4.1
IL_000a: add
IL_000b: stsfld int32 PreOrPostIncrement.Program::SomethingToIncrement
IL_0010: ldloc.0
IL_0011: ldc.i4.1
IL_0012: add
IL_0013: stloc.0
IL_0014: ldloc.0
IL_0015: ldarg.0
IL_0016: blt.s IL_0004
IL_0018: ret
} // end of method Program::PreIncrement
*/
for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
{
++SomethingToIncrement;
}
}
static void PostIncrement(int count)
{
/*
.method private hidebysig static void PostIncrement(int32 count) cil managed
{
// Code size 25 (0x19)
.maxstack 2
.locals init ([0] int32 i)
IL_0000: ldc.i4.0
IL_0001: stloc.0
IL_0002: br.s IL_0014
IL_0004: ldsfld int32 PreOrPostIncrement.Program::SomethingToIncrement
IL_0009: ldc.i4.1
IL_000a: add
IL_000b: stsfld int32 PreOrPostIncrement.Program::SomethingToIncrement
IL_0010: ldloc.0
IL_0011: ldc.i4.1
IL_0012: add
IL_0013: stloc.0
IL_0014: ldloc.0
IL_0015: ldarg.0
IL_0016: blt.s IL_0004
IL_0018: ret
} // end of method Program::PostIncrement
*/
for (int i = 0; i < count; i++)
{
SomethingToIncrement++;
}
}
}
}
在某些情况下,++i和i+1可能会给出不同的结果,-i, i - 1等也是如此。
这并不是因为递增和递减操作符的工作方式有缺陷,而是因为新程序员有时会忽略一个小事实。
根据经验,不要在数组的方括号内使用inc/dec。例如,我不会用arr[++ I]来代替arr[I + 1]。虽然两者得到的i值是一样的,但这里我们忽略了一些东西。
如果循环条件基于i的执行值,那么将arr[i + 1]替换为arr[++i]将导致错误。为什么?
假设i = 5,那么arr[i + 1]意味着arr[6],而arr[++i]虽然意味着arr[6],但也会将i的值改变为6,这可能不是我们想要做的事情。我们可能不想改变i的值,但由于一个简单的++/——操作符,我们改变了这个值。
所以在使用++/——操作符时要小心。
我希望我能使我的观点更容易理解。
正如@Jon B所说,在for循环中没有区别。
但在一段时间或做…While循环,如果你与++i或i++进行比较,你会发现一些不同
while(i++ < 10) { ... } //compare then increment
while(++i < 10) { ... } //increment then compare
关于++i和i++,不仅仅是循环和性能差异。++i返回一个l值,i++返回一个r值。基于此,可以对(++i)执行许多操作,但不能对(i++)执行许多操作。
1- It is illegal to take the address of post increment result. Compiler won't even allow you.
2- Only constant references to post increment can exist, i.e., of the form const T&.
3- You cannot apply another post increment or decrement to the result of i++, i.e., there is no such thing as I++++. This would be parsed as ( i ++ ) ++ which is illegal.
4- When overloading pre-/post-increment and decrement operators, programmers are encouraged to define post- increment/decrement operators like:
T& operator ++ ( )
{
// logical increment
return *this;
}
const T operator ++ ( int )
{
T temp( *this );
++*this;
return temp;
}
对于用户定义类型的i,这些操作符可以(但不应该)在循环索引上下文中具有有意义的不同语义,这可能(但不应该)影响所描述的循环的行为。
此外,在c++中,使用预增量形式(++i)通常是最安全的,因为它更容易优化。(斯科特·朗廷(Scott Langham)先我一步找到了这个花边新闻。诅咒你,斯科特)