C++ 三目操作符与ifelse效率的区别

最新推荐文章于 2022-07-09 18:52:37 发布

ayrb13

最新推荐文章于 2022-07-09 18:52:37 发布

阅读量261

点赞数

本文链接：https://blog.csdn.net/ayrb13/article/details/8177569

版权

测试环境Linux version 2.6.18-194.el5gcc 版本4.6.3


测试代码分两部分
main1.cpp
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
	int d = 10;
	int e = 0;
	if(d > 8)
		e = 10;
	else e = 5;
	return 0;
}


main2.cpp
int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
	int d = 10;
	int e = 0;
	e = d > 8 ? 10 : 5;
	return 0;
}


无任何优化选项
makefile:
all : main1 main2



main1 : main1.cpp

g++ -S main1.cpp -o main1.s

main2 : main2.cpp

g++ -S main2.cpp -o main2.s


编译出的汇编代码是
main1.s
	.file	"main1.cpp"
	.text
	.globl	main
	.type	main, @function
main:
.LFB0:
	.cfi_startproc
	pushl	%ebp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
	.cfi_offset 5, -8
	movl	%esp, %ebp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register 5
	subl	$16, %esp
	movl	$10, -4(%ebp)
	movl	$0, -8(%ebp)
	cmpl	$8, -4(%ebp)
	jle	.L2
	movl	$10, -8(%ebp)
	jmp	.L3
.L2:
	movl	$5, -8(%ebp)
.L3:
	movl	$0, %eax
	leave
	.cfi_restore 5
	.cfi_def_cfa 4, 4
	ret
	.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
	.size	main, .-main
	.ident	"GCC: (GNU) 4.6.3"
	.section	.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits


main2.s
	.file	"main2.cpp"
	.text
	.globl	main
	.type	main, @function
main:
.LFB0:
	.cfi_startproc
	pushl	%ebp
	.cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
	.cfi_offset 5, -8
	movl	%esp, %ebp
	.cfi_def_cfa_register 5
	subl	$16, %esp
	movl	$10, -4(%ebp)
	movl	$0, -8(%ebp)
	cmpl	$8, -4(%ebp)
	jle	.L2
	movl	$10, %eax
	jmp	.L3
.L2:
	movl	$5, %eax
.L3:
	movl	%eax, -8(%ebp)
	movl	$0, %eax
	leave
	.cfi_restore 5
	.cfi_def_cfa 4, 4
	ret
	.cfi_endproc
.LFE0:
	.size	main, .-main
	.ident	"GCC: (GNU) 4.6.3"
	.section	.note.GNU-stack,"",@progbits


区别在于main2.s中做完判断后先将值赋予了寄存器，然后再从寄存器取值存入内存
main1.s中直接向内存赋值，由此可见，ifelse效率在此种情况下高于三目运算符。
欢迎来喷