A)比B).........更安全想象一下，如果你在循环中初始化结构而不是'int'或'float'然后呢?

就像

typedef struct loop_example{

JXTZ hi; // where JXTZ could be another type...say closed source lib 
         // you include in Makefile

}loop_example_struct;

//then....

int j = 0; // declare here or face c99 error if in loop - depends on compiler setting

for ( ;j++; )
{
   loop_example loop_object; // guess the result in memory heap?
}

您肯定会遇到内存泄漏的问题!因此，我认为“A”是更安全的赌注，而“B”是容易受到内存积累的影响，特别是工作在近源库中。你可以在Linux上使用“Valgrind”工具检查，特别是子工具“Helgrind”。

好吧，你可以为它设定一个范围:

{ //Or if(true) if the language doesn't support making scopes like this
    double intermediateResult;
    for (int i=0; i<1000; i++) {
        intermediateResult = i;
        System.out.println(intermediateResult);
    }
}

这样你只声明了变量一次，当你离开循环时它就死了。

我用Node 4.0.0测试了JS，如果有人感兴趣的话。在循环外声明会导致~。平均超过1000次试验，每次试验1亿次循环，性能提高5毫秒。所以我要用最易读/可维护的方式来写，在我看来就是B。我本想把我的代码放在小提琴中，但我使用了现在性能的Node模块。代码如下:

var now = require("../node_modules/performance-now")

// declare vars inside loop
function varInside(){
    for(var i = 0; i < 100000000; i++){
        var temp = i;
        var temp2 = i + 1;
        var temp3 = i + 2;
    }
}

// declare vars outside loop
function varOutside(){
    var temp;
    var temp2;
    var temp3;
    for(var i = 0; i < 100000000; i++){
        temp = i
        temp2 = i + 1
        temp3 = i + 2
    }
}

// for computing average execution times
var insideAvg = 0;
var outsideAvg = 0;

// run varInside a million times and average execution times
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){
    var start = now()
    varInside()
    var end = now()
    insideAvg = (insideAvg + (end-start)) / 2
}

// run varOutside a million times and average execution times
for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++){
    var start = now()
    varOutside()
    var end = now()
    outsideAvg = (outsideAvg + (end-start)) / 2
}

console.log('declared inside loop', insideAvg)
console.log('declared outside loop', outsideAvg)

以下是我在。net中编写和编译的内容。

double r0;
for (int i = 0; i < 1000; i++) {
    r0 = i*i;
    Console.WriteLine(r0);
}

for (int j = 0; j < 1000; j++) {
    double r1 = j*j;
    Console.WriteLine(r1);
}

这是我从。net Reflector中得到的，当CIL被渲染回代码时。

for (int i = 0; i < 0x3e8; i++)
{
    double r0 = i * i;
    Console.WriteLine(r0);
}
for (int j = 0; j < 0x3e8; j++)
{
    double r1 = j * j;
    Console.WriteLine(r1);
}

So both look exactly same after compilation. In managed languages code is converted into CL/byte code and at time of execution it's converted into machine language. So in machine language a double may not even be created on the stack. It may just be a register as code reflect that it is a temporary variable for WriteLine function. There are a whole set optimization rules just for loops. So the average guy shouldn't be worried about it, especially in managed languages. There are cases when you can optimize manage code, for example, if you have to concatenate a large number of strings using just string a; a+=anotherstring[i] vs using StringBuilder. There is very big difference in performance between both. There are a lot of such cases where the compiler cannot optimize your code, because it cannot figure out what is intended in a bigger scope. But it can pretty much optimize basic things for you.

我怀疑一些编译器可以将两者优化为相同的代码，但肯定不是全部。所以我觉得你还是选择前者比较好。使用后者的唯一原因是希望确保声明的变量仅在循环中使用。

当我想在退出循环后查看变量的内容时，我使用(A)。它只与调试有关。当我希望代码更紧凑时，我使用(B)，因为它节省了一行代码。