>S++ or S=S+1, which can be recommended to increment the value

>not using ++S

>>56233272
That's a compiler's work.
Just write S = S + 1 in a higher language.

>>56233291
S += 1

>>56233272
>This retardation is on TWO websites

>>56233291
>not knowing the 2 are different

>>56233403
this, I like this more
I only use python though

>>56233291
best

>>56233272
Who gives a shit. Did you just learn how to program?

>S++
>single machine instruction

lmoa, in what fucking world?

File: operations.png (14KB, 891x380px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 891x380px

>>56233272
Does this answer your question?
If S is a primitive type and you don't care for the expression value, the compiler will generate identical code for all expressions.

>>56233964
I didn't have a question...

>>56234013
There's a question mark in your post, so yeah you did ask a question.

>>56234047
I copied it from a website because it's stupid

>>56233272
The compiler should be smart enough to optimize it.

I'm NOT sure how it would handle something like

while true
    print array[i++]

though.

>>56233729
Most instruction sets include an increment instruction, which they should be able to use if the variable is already in a register.

>>56234430
why are you not sure?

>>56235944
Because I'm pretty sure most instruction sets can't read a value from an array, pass it to a function, and increment the array index in a single instruction. Incrementing a value is much simpler, taking only one instruction if it's already in a register.

>>56236819
It should do it exactly as you described. There's no way that would just be one instruction.