derek5. 2013-06-13 19:21 采纳率: 100%
浏览 733
已采纳

判断一个整数是否介于两个整数(含已知值)之间的最快方法

Is there a faster way than x >= start && x <= end in C or C++ to test if an integer is between two integers?

UPDATE: My specific platform is iOS. This is part of a box blur function that restricts pixels to a circle in a given square.

UPDATE: After trying the accepted answer, I got an order of magnitude speedup on the one line of code over doing it the normal x >= start && x <= end way.

UPDATE: Here is the after and before code with assembler from XCode:

NEW WAY

// diff = (end - start) + 1
#define POINT_IN_RANGE_AND_INCREMENT(p, range) ((p++ - range.start) < range.diff)

Ltmp1313:
 ldr    r0, [sp, #176] @ 4-byte Reload
 ldr    r1, [sp, #164] @ 4-byte Reload
 ldr    r0, [r0]
 ldr    r1, [r1]
 sub.w  r0, r9, r0
 cmp    r0, r1
 blo    LBB44_30

OLD WAY

#define POINT_IN_RANGE_AND_INCREMENT(p, range) (p <= range.end && p++ >= range.start)

Ltmp1301:
 ldr    r1, [sp, #172] @ 4-byte Reload
 ldr    r1, [r1]
 cmp    r0, r1
 bls    LBB44_32
 mov    r6, r0
 b      LBB44_33
LBB44_32:
 ldr    r1, [sp, #188] @ 4-byte Reload
 adds   r6, r0, #1
Ltmp1302:
 ldr    r1, [r1]
 cmp    r0, r1
 bhs    LBB44_36

Pretty amazing how reducing or eliminating branching can provide such a dramatic speed up.

转载于:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17095324/fastest-way-to-determine-if-an-integer-is-between-two-integers-inclusive-with

  • 写回答

4条回答 默认 最新

  • 斗士狗 2013-06-13 19:34
    关注

    There's an old trick to do this with only one comparison/branch. Whether it'll really improve speed may be open to question, and even if it does, it's probably too little to notice or care about, but when you're only starting with two comparisons, the chances of a huge improvement are pretty remote. The code looks like:

    // use a < for an inclusive lower bound and exclusive upper bound
    // use <= for an inclusive lower bound and inclusive upper bound
    // alternatively, if the upper bound is inclusive and you can pre-calculate
    //  upper-lower, simply add + 1 to upper-lower and use the < operator.
        if ((unsigned)(number-lower) <= (upper-lower))
            in_range(number);
    

    With a typical, modern computer (i.e., anything using twos complement), the conversion to unsigned is really a nop -- just a change in how the same bits are viewed.

    Note that in a typical case, you can pre-compute upper-lower outside a (presumed) loop, so that doesn't normally contribute any significant time. Along with reducing the number of branch instructions, this also (generally) improves branch prediction. In this case, the same branch is taken whether the number is below the bottom end or above the top end of the range.

    As to how this works, the basic idea is pretty simple: a negative number, when viewed as an unsigned number, will be larger than anything that started out as a positive number.

    In practice this method translates number and the interval to the point of origin and checks if number is in the interval [0, D], where D = upper - lower. If number below lower bound: negative, and if above upper bound: larger than D.

    本回答被题主选为最佳回答 , 对您是否有帮助呢?
    评论
查看更多回答(3条)

报告相同问题?

悬赏问题

  • ¥15 Vue3 大型图片数据拖动排序
  • ¥15 划分vlan后不通了
  • ¥15 GDI处理通道视频时总是带有白色锯齿
  • ¥20 用雷电模拟器安装百达屋apk一直闪退
  • ¥15 算能科技20240506咨询(拒绝大模型回答)
  • ¥15 自适应 AR 模型 参数估计Matlab程序
  • ¥100 角动量包络面如何用MATLAB绘制
  • ¥15 merge函数占用内存过大
  • ¥15 使用EMD去噪处理RML2016数据集时候的原理
  • ¥15 神经网络预测均方误差很小 但是图像上看着差别太大