我说这些是为了参加编程比赛。一般来说，他们有非常大的输入，除以2会发生很多次，已知输入是正的或负的。

X >>1比X /2好。我在ideone.com上运行了一个程序，其中发生了超过10^10除以2的运算。X /2花了将近5.5s，而X >>1花了将近2.6s。

哪一个是最好的选择，为什么整数除以2?

这取决于你对最佳的定义。

如果你想让你的同事讨厌你，或者让你的代码难以阅读，我肯定会选择第一个选择。

如果你想把一个数除以2，就用第二个数。

这两者是不等价的，如果数字是负的或在更大的表达式中，它们的行为是不一样的——bitshift的优先级比+或-低，除法的优先级更高。

您应该编写代码来表达其意图。如果您关心的是性能，不要担心，优化器在这类微优化方面做得很好。

我说这些是为了参加编程比赛。一般来说，他们有非常大的输入，除以2会发生很多次，已知输入是正的或负的。

X >>1比X /2好。我在ideone.com上运行了一个程序，其中发生了超过10^10除以2的运算。X /2花了将近5.5s，而X >>1花了将近2.6s。

查看编译器的输出来帮助您做出决定。我在x86-64上使用 gcc (gcc) 4.2.1 20070719 [FreeBSD]

也可以在godbolt上看到编译器的在线输出。

What you see is the compiler does use a sarl (arithmetic right-shift) instruction in both cases, so it does recognize the similarity between the two expressions. If you use the divide, the compiler also needs to adjust for negative numbers. To do that it shifts the sign bit down to the lowest order bit, and adds that to the result. This fixes the off-by-one issue when shifting negative numbers, compared to what a divide would do. Since the divide case does 2 shifts, while the explicit shift case only does one, we can now explain some of the performance differences measured by other answers here.

C代码与汇编输出:

对于除法，你的输入是

int div2signed(int a) {
  return a / 2;
}

这个编译成

    movl    %edi, %eax
    shrl    $31, %eax            # (unsigned)x >> 31
    addl    %edi, %eax           # tmp = x + (x<0)
    sarl    %eax                 # (x + 0 or 1) >> 1  arithmetic right shift
    ret

shift也是一样

int shr2signed(int a) {
  return a >> 1;
}

输出:

    sarl    %edi
    movl    %edi, %eax
    ret

其他isa即使不能做得更好，也能同样有效地做到这一点。例如GCC For AArch64使用:

        add     w0, w0, w0, lsr 31      // x += (unsigned)x>>31
        asr     w0, w0, 1               // x >>= 1
        ret

Mod 2, test for = 1。不知道c中的语法，但这可能是最快的。

这个问题的答案取决于你工作的环境。

If you're working on an 8-bit microcontroller or anything without hardware support for multiplication, bit shifting is expected and commonplace, and while the compiler will almost certainly turn x /= 2 into x >>= 1, the presence of a division symbol will raise more eyebrows in that environment than using a shift to effect a division. If you're working in a performance-critical environment or section of code, or your code could be compiled with compiler optimization off, x >>= 1 with a comment explaining its reasoning is probably best just for clarity of purpose. If you're not under one of the above conditions, make your code more readable by simply using x /= 2. Better to save the next programmer who happens to look at your code the 10 second double-take on your shift operation than to needlessly prove you knew the shift was more efficient sans compiler optimization.

所有这些假设都是无符号整数。简单的移位可能不是你想要的符号。此外，DanielH提出了一个关于在ActionScript等特定语言中使用x *= 0.5的好观点。