我认为正确的答案是:

为什么不用基本运算符来做基本运算呢?

通过使用eval和字符串连接来在“幕后”使用/操作符是欺骗吗?

例如，在Javacript中，您可以这样做

function div3 (n) {
    var div = String.fromCharCode(47);
    return eval([n, div, 3].join(""));
}

没有反复检查这个答案是否已经发表。如果程序需要扩展到浮点数，可以将这些数字乘以所需精度的10*数，然后可以再次应用下面的代码。

#include <stdio.h>

int main()
{
    int aNumber = 500;
    int gResult = 0;

    int aLoop = 0;

    int i = 0;
    for(i = 0; i < aNumber; i++)
    {
        if(aLoop == 3)
        {
           gResult++;
           aLoop = 0;
        }  
        aLoop++;
    }

    printf("Reulst of %d / 3 = %d", aNumber, gResult);

    return 0;
}

Yet another solution. This should handle all ints (including negative ints) except the min value of an int, which would need to be handled as a hard coded exception. This basically does division by subtraction but only using bit operators (shifts, xor, & and complement). For faster speed, it subtracts 3 * (decreasing powers of 2). In c#, it executes around 444 of these DivideBy3 calls per millisecond (2.2 seconds for 1,000,000 divides), so not horrendously slow, but no where near as fast as a simple x/3. By comparison, Coodey's nice solution is about 5 times faster than this one.

public static int DivideBy3(int a) {
    bool negative = a < 0;
    if (negative) a = Negate(a);
    int result;
    int sub = 3 << 29;
    int threes = 1 << 29;
    result = 0;
    while (threes > 0) {
        if (a >= sub) {
            a = Add(a, Negate(sub));
            result = Add(result, threes);
        }
        sub >>= 1;
        threes >>= 1;
    }
    if (negative) result = Negate(result);
    return result;
}
public static int Negate(int a) {
    return Add(~a, 1);
}
public static int Add(int a, int b) {
    int x = 0;
    x = a ^ b;
    while ((a & b) != 0) {
        b = (a & b) << 1;
        a = x;
        x = a ^ b;
    }
    return x;
}

这是c#，因为这是我手边的东西，但与c的区别应该很小。

使用Linux shell脚本:

#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
    int number = 30;
    char command[25];
    snprintf(command, 25, "echo $((%d %c 3)) ", number, 47);
    system( command );
    return 0;
}

请看我的另一个答案。

我认为正确的答案是:

为什么不用基本运算符来做基本运算呢?