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。

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

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.

[执行摘要:如果没有特定的理由使用i++,请使用++i。]

对于c++来说,答案有点复杂。

如果i是一个简单类型(不是c++类的实例),那么C给出的答案(“不,没有性能差异”)成立,因为编译器正在生成代码。

但是,如果i是c++类的实例,则i++和++i将调用其中一个操作符++函数。下面是这些函数的标准组合:

Foo& Foo::operator++()   // called for ++i
{
    this->data += 1;
    return *this;
}

Foo Foo::operator++(int ignored_dummy_value)   // called for i++
{
    Foo tmp(*this);   // variable "tmp" cannot be optimized away by the compiler
    ++(*this);
    return tmp;
}

由于编译器不生成代码,而只是调用运算符++函数,因此没有办法优化掉tmp变量及其相关的复制构造函数。如果复制构造函数的开销很大,则会对性能产生重大影响。