我们的问题是,在C语言中i++和++i的性能有区别吗?
c++的答案是什么?
我们的问题是,在C语言中i++和++i的性能有区别吗?
c++的答案是什么?
当前回答
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.
其他回答
两者都一样快;) 如果你想在处理器上进行相同的计算,只是计算的顺序不同。
例如,以下代码:
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
int a = 0;
a++;
int b = 0;
++b;
return 0;
}
生产以下组件:
0x0000000100000f24 <main+0>: push %rbp 0x0000000100000f25 <main+1>: mov %rsp,%rbp 0x0000000100000f28 <main+4>: movl $0x0,-0x4(%rbp) 0x0000000100000f2f <main+11>: incl -0x4(%rbp) 0x0000000100000f32 <main+14>: movl $0x0,-0x8(%rbp) 0x0000000100000f39 <main+21>: incl -0x8(%rbp) 0x0000000100000f3c <main+24>: mov $0x0,%eax 0x0000000100000f41 <main+29>: leaveq .日志含义 0x0000000100000f42 <main+30>: retq
你可以看到,对于a++和b++,它是一个包含助记符,所以它是相同的操作;)
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。
++i比i++快,因为它不返回值的旧副本。
它也更直观:
x = i++; // x contains the old value of i
y = ++i; // y contains the new value of i
这个C语言的例子输出的是“02”而不是你所期望的“12”:
#include <stdio.h>
int main(){
int a = 0;
printf("%d", a++);
printf("%d", ++a);
return 0;
}
c++也是一样:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main(){
int a = 0;
cout << a++;
cout << ++a;
return 0;
}
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
@wilhelmtell
编译器可以省略临时对象。从另一个线程逐字逐句:
c++编译器允许消除基于堆栈的临时对象,即使这样做会改变程序行为。MSDN链接vc8:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms364057 (VS.80) . aspx