Hi which one is faster int a = 100; //First Way if (a != 100) { //Do something when a is not equal to 100 } else { //Do something when a is equal to 100 } //Second Way if (a == 100) { //Do something when a is equal to 100 } else { /
你好哪一个更快 int a = 100; //First Way if (a != 100) { //Do something when a is not equal to 100 } else { //Do something when a is equal to 100 } //Second Way if (a == 100) { //Do something when a is equal to 100 } else { //Do some
Is < cheaper (faster) than <= , and similarly, is > cheaper (faster) than >= ? Disclaimer: I know I could measure but that will be on my machine only and I am not sure if the answer could be "implementation specific" or something like that. it varies, first start at examining different instruction sets and how how the compilers use those instruction sets. Take the openr
是<更便宜（快）比<= ，同样， >更便宜（快）比>= ？ 免责声明：我知道我可以测量，但这只会在我的机器上，我不确定答案可能是“具体实现”还是类似的。 它有所不同，首先从检查不同的指令集开始，以及编译器如何使用这些指令集。 以openrisc 32为例，这显然是mips的灵感，但条件不同。 对于or32有比较和置位标志指令，比较这两个寄存器如果小于或等于无符号则设置标志，比较这两个寄存器是否相等设置标志。 然
Back in the day when I was learning C and assembly we were taught it is better to use simple comparisons to increase speed. So for example if you say: if(x <= 0) versus if(x < 1) which would execute faster? My argument (which may be wrong) is the second would almost always execute faster because there is only a single comparison) ie is it less than one, yes or no. Whereas the first
早在我学习C和汇编的那一天，我们学习了使用简单比较来提高速度更好。 例如，如果你说： if(x <= 0) 与 if(x < 1) 哪个会执行得更快？ 我的观点（这可能是错误的）是第二个几乎总是会执行得更快，因为只有一个比较），即它是否小于1，是或否。 然而，如果数字小于0，则第一个将快速执行，因为这相当于真实，所以不需要检查等于使其等于第二个，但是，如果数目为0或更多，它将总是较慢，因为它必须进行第二次比较，
This question already has an answer here: Is < faster than <=? 13 answers Those two loops are identical in execution. The second part of the for expression is the comparison to be used to determine continuation of the loop; since you are starting from zero and incrementing by one, these two expressions will always yield the same results.
这个问题在这里已经有了答案： 是<快于<=？ 13个答案 这两个循环在执行中是相同的。 for表达式的第二部分是用于确定循环的继续的比较; 由于您从零开始并递增1，因此这两个表达式总是会产生相同的结果。
I was reading K&R book and wanted to test out printf() and putchar() functions in ways that I never tried. I encountered several unexpected events and would like to hear from more experienced programmers why that happens. char c; while((c = getchar()) != EOF) { //put char(c); printf("%d your character was.n", c); } How would one get EOF (end of file) in the input stream (getchar() or s
我正在阅读K＆R书，并想以我从未尝试过的方式测试printf（）和putchar（）函数。 我遇到了一些意想不到的事件，并希望听到更多有经验的程序员为什么发生这种情况。 char c; while((c = getchar()) != EOF) { //put char(c); printf("%d your character was.n", c); } 如何在输入流（getchar（）或scanf（）函数）中获得EOF（文件结尾）？ 意外的键不被getchar（）/ scanf（）函数识别可以产生它？ 在我的书中，它说c必
The getter would get a message about the state of the struct it's in, which is defined by a combination of the struct's properties, which are finite. First, this isn't about micro-optimization, I just think that: StringBuilder msg = new StringBuilder(); ... msg.AppendLine("static string"); ... looks cleaner then: String msg = String.Empty; ... msg = String.Concat(msg, "static str
getter会得到一个关于它所在结构的状态的消息，这个消息是由结构的属性组合来定义的，这些属性是有限的。 首先，这不是关于微观优化，我只是认为： StringBuilder msg = new StringBuilder(); ... msg.AppendLine("static string"); ... 看起来更清洁： String msg = String.Empty; ... msg = String.Concat(msg, "static string", System.Environment.NewLine) ... 所以只是一个美学选择。 msg变量必须以任何方式初始化
This question already has an answer here: What is the equivalent of memset in C#? 13 answers For small arrays use array initialisation syntax: var sevenItems = new byte[] { 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20 }; For larger arrays use a standard for loop. This is the most readable and efficient way to do it: var sevenThousandItems = new byte[7000]; for (int i = 0; i < sevenThousan
这个问题在这里已经有了答案： 什么是C＃中的memset的等价物？ 13个答案 对于小型数组，使用数组初始化语法： var sevenItems = new byte[] { 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20 }; 对于较大的阵列使用一个标准的for循环。 这是做到这一点最可读和最有效的方式： var sevenThousandItems = new byte[7000]; for (int i = 0; i < sevenThousandItems.Length; i++) { sevenThousandItems[i] = 0x20; } 当
I've read multiple posts and blogs similar to Delegate-based strongly-typed URL generation in ASP.NET MVC But none of them really quite do what I'd like to do. Currently I have a hybrid approach like: // shortened for Brevity public static Exts { public string Action(this UrlHelper url, Expression<Func<T, ActionResult>> expression) where T : ControllerBase
我读过类似于多个帖子和博客 ASP.NET MVC中基于委托的强类型URL生成 但他们没有一个真正做我想做的事情。 目前我有一个混合的方法，如： // shortened for Brevity public static Exts { public string Action(this UrlHelper url, Expression<Func<T, ActionResult>> expression) where T : ControllerBase { return Exts.Action(url, expression, null); } public string Action(thi
I want to sort dynamic in lambda entity framework.I founded it more time, but seem not work. ////string column_name // the name of column in table <<< don't care this, I finished ////string sort_order // ASC or DESC <<< don't care this, I finished using (var db = new ABCEntities()) { // get dynamic type of column name , but i can not // ??????????? var colum
我想在lambda实体框架中对动态进行排序。我创建了它更多的时间，但似乎不工作。 ////string column_name // the name of column in table <<< don't care this, I finished ////string sort_order // ASC or DESC <<< don't care this, I finished using (var db = new ABCEntities()) { // get dynamic type of column name , but i can not // ??????????? var columnExp = typeof(LOCA
We are reading some signals from pins and setting some more events based on this reading. To be safe, I want to sample the pins 3 times, compare the three values and use the most common value (ie sample A is 1, B is 3 and C is 1, I want to use 1, if AB and C are all 2 then use 2 but if A is 1 , B is 2 and C is 3, I want to capture the three samples again). Currently I'm using: int getCAP
我们正在读取一些引脚信号，并根据此读数设置更多事件。 为了安全起见，我想对引脚进行3次采样，比较三个值并使用最常见的值（即样本A是1，B是3，C是1，如果AB和C都是，我想使用1 2然后使用2，但如果A是1，B是2和C是3，我想再次捕获三个样本）。 目前我正在使用： int getCAPValues (void) { // Get three samples to check CAP signals are stable: uint32_t x = (PORT->Group[IN_PORT_CAP].IN.reg & IN