（一般查询）为什么n ++执行速度比n + 1快

本文介绍了（一般查询）为什么n ++执行速度比n + 1快的处理方法，对大家解决问题具有一定的参考价值，需要的朋友们下面随着小编来一起学习吧！ 问题描述

为什么n ++的执行速度比n + 1还要快......还是realli执行得更快？ 谢谢 Venugopal.B

Hi, why n++ executes faster than n+1..... or does it realli execute faster? thanks Venugopal.B

推荐答案

VenuGopal< Ve ******* @ discussion.microsoft>写道： VenuGopal <Ve*******@discussions.microsoft> wrote: 为什么n ++执行速度比n + 1还要快......还是realli执行得更快？ why n++ executes faster than n+1..... or does it realli execute faster?

我想你的意思是问： |如果n是int，那么 | n ++; |执行速度比 |快n = n + 1; | ？ 上面的答案是：不。两个语句都编译成确切的 相同的IL指令。

I assume that you mean to ask: | If n is an int, does | n++; | execute faster than | n = n + 1; | ? The answer to the above is: no. Both statements compile down to the exact same IL instructions.

n ++只是更快地输入... - - David Anton www.tangiblesoftwaresolutions 主页： 清除VB：清理过时的VB.NET代码 即时C＃：从VB.NET转换为C＃ 即时VB：从C＃转换为VB.NET 即时J＃：从VB.NET转换为J＃ " VenuGopal"写道： n++ just types faster... -- David Anton www.tangiblesoftwaresolutions Home of: Clear VB: Cleans up outdated VB.NET code Instant C#: Converts from VB.NET to C# Instant VB: Converts from C# to VB.NET Instant J#: Converts from VB.NET to J# "VenuGopal" wrote: 为什么n ++执行速度比n + 1还要快.....还是realli执行得更快？ 感谢< Venugopal.B Hi, why n++ executes faster than n+1..... or does it realli execute faster? thanks Venugopal.B

我听过面试问题，为什么++ n的执行速度比n ++更快？？ br /> 前缀运算符总是比后缀更快。后缀 版本涉及对前缀的复制和内部调用。对于简单的 类型，两者之间的相对成本应该很小。对于更多 复杂对象（例如迭代向量），成本可能会大于b 。 C ++文献中的普遍共识（更多例外C ++，更多有效的C ++）是前缀版本应始终是优先的b / b 。这样做你不会出错。另外，写++ 而不是++不需要任何费用。 I have heard interview questions about why would ++n executes faster than n++? The prefix operator will always be faster than the postfix. The postfix version involves a copy and internal call to the prefix. For simple types the relative cost between the two should be small. For more complicated objects (e.g. iterating over a vector) the cost may be larger. The general consensus in C++ literature (More Exceptional C++, More Effective C++) is that the prefix version should always be preferred. Doing this you cannot go wrong. In addition, writing ++ instead of ++ costs nothing.