Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 6167869
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 23, 20262026-05-23T22:35:18+00:00 2026-05-23T22:35:18+00:00

For example, here are two ways to set an integer variable (say C++): int

  • 0

For example, here are two ways to set an integer variable (say C++):

int x = 0xFF;
int y = 255;

Which statement would compile faster to set the actual bits to the integer value?

Edited: *compile changed from execute. I assumed the conversion to binary was at execution time, but seems to be at compile time given @muntoo’s answer

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-23T22:35:19+00:00Added an answer on May 23, 2026 at 10:35 pm

    There is absolutely no difference in execution time, and probably no difference in compilation speed.

    Added in response to comment:
    Here’s what happens. The compiler has a parser, probably recursive-descent, and at bottom it calls a lexer to get tokens. In this case the token after = is a number, which it can tell by the leading digit, so it goes something like this, where pc is a pointer to the current character:

    if (isdigit(*pc)){
      intpart = 0;
      if (pc[0]=='0' && pc[1]=='x'){
        pc += 2;
        while(ishexdigit(*pc)){
          intpart *= 16;
          if (isdigit(*pc)){
            intpart += (*pc - '0')
          }
          else {
            intpart += (tolower(*pc) - 'a' + 10);
          }
          pc++;
        }
      }
      else {
        while(isdigit(*pc)){
          intpart *= 10;
          intpart += (*pc - '0');
          pc++;
        }
        if (*pc == '.'){
          // ... handle fractional part
        }
      }
    }
    

    Anyway, as you can see, it’s a pretty tight loop that does isdigit or ishexdigit or tolower once or twice for each character in the number, and multiplication, subtraction, and addition. Assuming those functions are in-line, we’re talking maybe 10-20 instructions per character.
    It’s maybe slightly more instructions per character in the hex case, but the decimal number will have somewhat more characters, so it’s hard to tell a-priori which should be faster.
    This only happens for the total number of such integers you had the energy to type in your code, like maybe around a 100.
    If the machine can do, say, 10^8 instructions per second, it can read digits at the rate of around 10^7 per second, or around 100 nanoseconds per character, or 10 microseconds for all the numbers in your file, give or take an order of magnitude.

    Once the compiler knows it’s a number, it just becomes part of the abstract syntax tree, which is used to generate assembly language. By that time, the fact that it was hexadecimal or decimal has long since been forgotten. All it knows is it’s a binary integer of a certain value, so the assembly language will be identical.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Here is a specific example which is not CLS-complaint according to VS.NET 2005. Public
OK, probably best to give an example here of what I mean. Imagine a
ex: <a><strike>example data in here</strike></a> I want everything inside the a tag, to the
Here is an example of what I've got going on: CREATE TABLE Parent (id
Here is an example of polymorphism from http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/polymorphism.html (edited for readability): // abstract base
Here's a perfect example of the problem: Classifier gem breaks Rails . ** Original
here is my example code: Public Class Parent Private _TestProperty As String Private WithEvents
Here's an example: Double d = (1/3); System.out.println(d); This returns 0, not 0.33333... as
Here's a PHP example of mine. Can anyone find a shorter/easier way to do
Here is an example: <h:outputText value=#{myBean.myMoney}> <f:convertNumber type=currency currencySymbol=$ /> </h:outputText> Given that I

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.