Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. The Lounge
  3. POLL: Programming style - i++ vs. ++i

POLL: Programming style - i++ vs. ++i

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved The Lounge
htmlvisual-studiodesignbusinesshelp
26 Posts 19 Posters 3 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • G Gary R Wheeler

    In terms of compiler optimization intelligence, I think we've finally surpassed the smarts of the VAX FORTRAN compiler of the late 80's. A human being could not write code that was more efficient than what that compiler generated.


    Software Zen: delete this;

    RaviBeeR Offline
    RaviBeeR Offline
    RaviBee
    wrote on last edited by
    #13

    Memories... (my Mass license plate is VAX-VMS) :cool: Spent 8 very happy years @ Digital (when it was still Digital). /ravi My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | Freeware | Music ravib@ravib.com

    G 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • J John M Drescher

      I rarely use ++i because then I would have to take a few seconds to think on which order things are executed... John

      J Offline
      J Offline
      Jonathan de Halleux
      wrote on last edited by
      #14

      I use foreach. :) Jonathan de Halleux - My Blog

      R 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • R Rick York

        I wish there was a neither option. I try to avoid both and use i += 1. Two reasons : I wrote a scripting engine and I saw little reason for the ++ and -- operators and did not include them. This got me into the habit of using the += and -= operators which I did include. Second reason - if, for some odd reason, the incrementer needs to change to a 2 it is easier. Actually, a macro or "const int" value for the incrementer is a better way to go which I prefer to use along with the += and -= operators. Bottom line - I prefer the += method to be as consistent as possible but that's just me. __________________________________________ a two cent stamp short of going postal.

        D Offline
        D Offline
        Daniel Turini
        wrote on last edited by
        #15

        Rick York wrote: I saw little reason for the ++ and -- operators and did not include them You code in C**++** and do not see the need for the ++ operator? :omg::wtf: Yes, even I am blogging now!

        R 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • P peterchen

          After a batch of interviews, the second most notable thing is that where both ++i and i++ are possible, all candidates used i++ Having optimizied for older compilers I automatically opt for the "simpler" concept of ++i except where I explicitely need the postfix increment. (I now that it makes no difference to today's compilers, but it might still save some microseconds when compiling :rolleyes: ) so - Vote 5 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; ++i) , and Vote 1 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; i++) for you. if the "programming" in the title triggers a pawlowian in you, please vote 3


          we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
          sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

          L Offline
          L Offline
          Lost User
          wrote on last edited by
          #16

          ++i is safe there but a bad habit in other places so I stick with i++. Elaine :rose: The tigress is here :-D

          P 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • J Jonathan de Halleux

            I use foreach. :) Jonathan de Halleux - My Blog

            R Offline
            R Offline
            roel_
            wrote on last edited by
            #17

            Spoken with wisdom :)

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • L Lost User

              ++i is safe there but a bad habit in other places so I stick with i++. Elaine :rose: The tigress is here :-D

              P Offline
              P Offline
              peterchen
              wrote on last edited by
              #18

              Trollslayer wrote: but a bad habit in other places where? (never encountered one)


              we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
              sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • C Christian Graus

                ++i, for sure. Although a compiler may optimise, it's in theory more efficient, and never less so. Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder

                P Offline
                P Offline
                peterchen
                wrote on last edited by
                #19

                exactly my thought - dunno why you were voted down...


                we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
                sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

                C 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • P peterchen

                  After a batch of interviews, the second most notable thing is that where both ++i and i++ are possible, all candidates used i++ Having optimizied for older compilers I automatically opt for the "simpler" concept of ++i except where I explicitely need the postfix increment. (I now that it makes no difference to today's compilers, but it might still save some microseconds when compiling :rolleyes: ) so - Vote 5 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; ++i) , and Vote 1 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; i++) for you. if the "programming" in the title triggers a pawlowian in you, please vote 3


                  we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
                  sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

                  M Offline
                  M Offline
                  megaadam
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #20

                  // real programmers use i = false ? 1 - i : 1 + i; :suss: _____________________________________ Action without thought is not action Action without emotion is not life

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • P peterchen

                    After a batch of interviews, the second most notable thing is that where both ++i and i++ are possible, all candidates used i++ Having optimizied for older compilers I automatically opt for the "simpler" concept of ++i except where I explicitely need the postfix increment. (I now that it makes no difference to today's compilers, but it might still save some microseconds when compiling :rolleyes: ) so - Vote 5 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; ++i) , and Vote 1 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; i++) for you. if the "programming" in the title triggers a pawlowian in you, please vote 3


                    we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
                    sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

                    D Offline
                    D Offline
                    David Wulff
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #21

                    peterchen wrote: please vote 3 Won't that skew the results? I thought different levels of members got different vote weights. :~ FWIW I'm an i++ guy.


                    David Wulff The Royal Woofle Museum

                    Putting the laughter back into slaughter

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • P peterchen

                      After a batch of interviews, the second most notable thing is that where both ++i and i++ are possible, all candidates used i++ Having optimizied for older compilers I automatically opt for the "simpler" concept of ++i except where I explicitely need the postfix increment. (I now that it makes no difference to today's compilers, but it might still save some microseconds when compiling :rolleyes: ) so - Vote 5 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; ++i) , and Vote 1 if it's for(int i=0; i<n; i++) for you. if the "programming" in the title triggers a pawlowian in you, please vote 3


                      we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
                      sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

                      A Offline
                      A Offline
                      Antony M Kancidrowski
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #22

                      Strange for incrementing integers in for statements I use i++ For incrementing itterators I use ++it. Ant. I'm hard, yet soft.
                      I'm coloured, yet clear.
                      I'm fuity and sweet.
                      I'm jelly, what am I? Muse on it further, I shall return!
                      - David Williams (Little Britain)

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • RaviBeeR RaviBee

                        Memories... (my Mass license plate is VAX-VMS) :cool: Spent 8 very happy years @ Digital (when it was still Digital). /ravi My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | Freeware | Music ravib@ravib.com

                        G Offline
                        G Offline
                        Gary Wheeler
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #23

                        Indeed. I used to write entire applications in DCL :-O.


                        Software Zen: delete this;

                        RaviBeeR 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • G Gary Wheeler

                          Indeed. I used to write entire applications in DCL :-O.


                          Software Zen: delete this;

                          RaviBeeR Offline
                          RaviBeeR Offline
                          RaviBee
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #24

                          Oh yeah! Remember the DEC Professional? They were kind enough to publish several of my DCL hacks. I recall (with awe) when DCL released with VMS 3.1 first offered the END IF clause. What power! :omg: /ravi My new year's resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | Freeware | Music ravib@ravib.com

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • D Daniel Turini

                            Rick York wrote: I saw little reason for the ++ and -- operators and did not include them You code in C**++** and do not see the need for the ++ operator? :omg::wtf: Yes, even I am blogging now!

                            R Offline
                            R Offline
                            Rick York
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #25

                            No, not in a scripting language that has no concept of objects. __________________________________________ a two cent stamp short of going postal.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • P peterchen

                              exactly my thought - dunno why you were voted down...


                              we are here to help each other get through this thing, whatever it is Vonnegut jr.
                              sighist || Agile Programming | doxygen

                              C Offline
                              C Offline
                              Christian Graus
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #26

                              I am ALWAYS voted down. Come to the soapbox if you want to find out why :P Christian I have drunk the cool-aid and found it wan and bitter. - Chris Maunder

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              Reply
                              • Reply as topic
                              Log in to reply
                              • Oldest to Newest
                              • Newest to Oldest
                              • Most Votes


                              • Login

                              • Don't have an account? Register

                              • Login or register to search.
                              • First post
                                Last post
                              0
                              • Categories
                              • Recent
                              • Tags
                              • Popular
                              • World
                              • Users
                              • Groups