Speed comparison

deviousdexter · 11-07-2008, 03:23 PM

What kind of performance difference will i see between code being run through the debugger as opposed to creating a standalone project for checking?

This is working on the premise that there are no watch points or break points active and i am just checking through the running state.

Should this be a concern on a small test project ?

i am continually improving my code as i go, as and when i establish better ways to achieve the same goal. but does this :-

Code:

int x;
int y;

x= 50;
y= 50;
for (x=0;x<10;x++)
{
for (y=0;y<10;y++)
{
//dosomething here
}
}

execute any faster than this :-

Code:

for(int x=0;x<10;x++)
{
for(int y=0;y<10;y++)
{
//do something here
}
}

apart from readability, is it any less efficient to declare things as you go ?

thanks

master5001 · 11-07-2008, 04:08 PM

Nope.

bling · 11-10-2008, 04:42 PM

don't worry about this stuff. the compiler will optimize it most of the time for you anyways. but assuming no optimizations, the 1st version is slower because x,y are declared to 0 (for C#, not C++), and then it's set to 50, and then it's set to 0 again. the 2nd version it gets set once.

11-07-2008, 03:23 PM	#1
deviousdexter Registered User Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 85	Speed comparison What kind of performance difference will i see between code being run through the debugger as opposed to creating a standalone project for checking? This is working on the premise that there are no watch points or break points active and i am just checking through the running state. Should this be a concern on a small test project ? i am continually improving my code as i go, as and when i establish better ways to achieve the same goal. but does this :- Code: int x; int y; x= 50; y= 50; for (x=0;x<10;x++) { for (y=0;y<10;y++) { //dosomething here } } execute any faster than this :- Code: for(int x=0;x<10;x++) { for(int y=0;y<10;y++) { //do something here } } apart from readability, is it any less efficient to declare things as you go ? thanks
deviousdexter is offline

11-07-2008, 04:08 PM	#2
master5001 Banned Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Visalia, CA, USA Posts: 3,699	Nope.
master5001 is offline

11-10-2008, 04:42 PM	#3
bling Registered User Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 188	don't worry about this stuff. the compiler will optimize it most of the time for you anyways. but assuming no optimizations, the 1st version is slower because x,y are declared to 0 (for C#, not C++), and then it's set to 50, and then it's set to 0 again. the 2nd version it gets set once.
bling is offline

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How to sort a simple linked list using swap-sort method	JOCAAN	C Programming	24	08-07-2009 11:48 AM
I am very new . . . :(	Eternalglory47	C++ Programming	6	09-05-2008 11:29 AM
Speed comparison between vector and 2*2 array	cunnus88	C++ Programming	5	11-25-2007 02:05 AM
Flight Simulator Wind Speed!!	Dilmerv	C++ Programming	6	03-20-2006 12:40 AM
C/C++ vs assembly: speed comparison	Just	C++ Programming	11	11-25-2002 03:33 PM