即使在没有性能优势的内置类型上也应该使用++i的原因是为了给自己养成一个好习惯。

谷歌c++风格指南说:

Preincrement and Predecrement Use prefix form (++i) of the increment and decrement operators with iterators and other template objects. Definition: When a variable is incremented (++i or i++) or decremented (--i or i--) and the value of the expression is not used, one must decide whether to preincrement (decrement) or postincrement (decrement). Pros: When the return value is ignored, the "pre" form (++i) is never less efficient than the "post" form (i++), and is often more efficient. This is because post-increment (or decrement) requires a copy of i to be made, which is the value of the expression. If i is an iterator or other non-scalar type, copying i could be expensive. Since the two types of increment behave the same when the value is ignored, why not just always pre-increment? Cons: The tradition developed, in C, of using post-increment when the expression value is not used, especially in for loops. Some find post-increment easier to read, since the "subject" (i) precedes the "verb" (++), just like in English. Decision: For simple scalar (non-object) values there is no reason to prefer one form and we allow either. For iterators and other template types, use pre-increment.

说编译器不能优化掉后缀情况下的临时变量副本是不完全正确的。用VC进行的快速测试表明，至少在某些情况下，它可以做到这一点。

在下面的例子中，生成的代码对于前缀和后缀是相同的，例如:

#include <stdio.h>

class Foo
{
public:

    Foo() { myData=0; }
    Foo(const Foo &rhs) { myData=rhs.myData; }

    const Foo& operator++()
    {
        this->myData++;
        return *this;
    }

    const Foo operator++(int)
    {
        Foo tmp(*this);
        this->myData++;
        return tmp;
    }

    int GetData() { return myData; }

private:

    int myData;
};

int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
    Foo testFoo;

    int count;
    printf("Enter loop count: ");
    scanf("%d", &count);

    for(int i=0; i<count; i++)
    {
        testFoo++;
    }

    printf("Value: %d\n", testFoo.GetData());
}

无论您使用的是++testFoo还是testfoo++，都将得到相同的结果代码。事实上，无需从用户读取计数，优化器将整个事情归结为一个常数。所以这个:

for(int i=0; i<10; i++)
{
    testFoo++;
}

printf("Value: %d\n", testFoo.GetData());

结果如下:

00401000  push        0Ah  
00401002  push        offset string "Value: %d\n" (402104h) 
00401007  call        dword ptr [__imp__printf (4020A0h)] 

因此，虽然后缀版本肯定会更慢，但如果你不使用它，优化器可能会足够好，可以摆脱临时副本。

下面是自增操作符位于不同转换单元时的基准测试。g++ 4.5编译器。

现在先忽略样式问题

// a.cc
#include <ctime>
#include <array>
class Something {
public:
    Something& operator++();
    Something operator++(int);
private:
    std::array<int,PACKET_SIZE> data;
};

int main () {
    Something s;

    for (int i=0; i<1024*1024*30; ++i) ++s; // warm up
    std::clock_t a = clock();
    for (int i=0; i<1024*1024*30; ++i) ++s;
    a = clock() - a;

    for (int i=0; i<1024*1024*30; ++i) s++; // warm up
    std::clock_t b = clock();
    for (int i=0; i<1024*1024*30; ++i) s++;
    b = clock() - b;

    std::cout << "a=" << (a/double(CLOCKS_PER_SEC))
              << ", b=" << (b/double(CLOCKS_PER_SEC)) << '\n';
    return 0;
}

O (n)增加

Test

// b.cc
#include <array>
class Something {
public:
    Something& operator++();
    Something operator++(int);
private:
    std::array<int,PACKET_SIZE> data;
};


Something& Something::operator++()
{
    for (auto it=data.begin(), end=data.end(); it!=end; ++it)
        ++*it;
    return *this;
}

Something Something::operator++(int)
{
    Something ret = *this;
    ++*this;
    return ret;
}

结果

在虚拟机上使用g++ 4.5的结果(计时以秒为单位):

Flags (--std=c++0x)       ++i   i++
-DPACKET_SIZE=50 -O1      1.70  2.39
-DPACKET_SIZE=50 -O3      0.59  1.00
-DPACKET_SIZE=500 -O1    10.51 13.28
-DPACKET_SIZE=500 -O3     4.28  6.82

O(1)增加

Test

现在让我们看看下面的文件:

// c.cc
#include <array>
class Something {
public:
    Something& operator++();
    Something operator++(int);
private:
    std::array<int,PACKET_SIZE> data;
};


Something& Something::operator++()
{
    return *this;
}

Something Something::operator++(int)
{
    Something ret = *this;
    ++*this;
    return ret;
}

它对增量没有任何影响。这模拟了增量具有恒定复杂度的情况。

结果

结果现在变化很大:

Flags (--std=c++0x)       ++i   i++
-DPACKET_SIZE=50 -O1      0.05   0.74
-DPACKET_SIZE=50 -O3      0.08   0.97
-DPACKET_SIZE=500 -O1     0.05   2.79
-DPACKET_SIZE=500 -O3     0.08   2.18
-DPACKET_SIZE=5000 -O3    0.07  21.90

结论

属性

如果不需要前一个值，请养成使用预递增的习惯。即使与内置类型保持一致，您也会习惯它，如果您用自定义类型替换内置类型，也不会有遭受不必要性能损失的风险。

Semantic-wise

i++表示递增i，但我对之前的值感兴趣。 ++i表示自增i，我对当前值感兴趣或者自增i，对之前的值不感兴趣。再说一次，你会习惯的，即使你现在还不习惯。

Knuth。

过早的优化是万恶之源。过早的悲观也是如此。

@Ketan

.．.加薪忽略了关于意图和性能的细节。有时我们想用iter++而不是++iter。

Obviously post and pre-increment have different semantics and I'm sure everyone agrees that when the result is used you should use the appropriate operator. I think the question is what should one do when the result is discarded (as in for loops). The answer to this question (IMHO) is that, since the performance considerations are negligible at best, you should do what is more natural. For myself ++i is more natural but my experience tells me that I'm in a minority and using i++ will cause less metal overhead for most people reading your code.

毕竟，这就是语言不叫“c++ C”的原因。[*]

[*]插入关于c++ C是一个更合乎逻辑的名称的必要讨论。

既然你也要求c++，下面是java的基准测试(用jmh制作):

private static final int LIMIT = 100000;

@Benchmark
public void postIncrement() {
    long a = 0;
    long b = 0;
    for (int i = 0; i < LIMIT; i++) {
        b = 3;
        a += i * (b++);
    }
    doNothing(a, b);
}

@Benchmark
public void preIncrement() {
    long a = 0;
    long b = 0;
    for (int i = 0; i < LIMIT; i++) {
        b = 3;
        a += i * (++b);
    }
    doNothing(a, b);
}  

结果表明，即使在某些计算中实际使用了增量变量(b)的值，迫使需要存储额外的值以防止后增量，每个操作的时间也完全相同:

Benchmark                         Mode  Cnt  Score   Error  Units
IncrementBenchmark.postIncrement  avgt   10  0,039   0,001  ms/op
IncrementBenchmark.preIncrement   avgt   10  0,039   0,001  ms/op