gcc is OBVIOUSLY optimized. % is always craploads slower than &. On a modern processor, a multiply, add, subtract, bitshift, etc., can be done in one cycle (assuming all operands are already loaded into registers), whereas a divide could take 10-50 or even more cycles.

To get gcc to not optimize anything away do something like this: 

#include <stdio.h>

volatile int yb;
int foo;

void blah(int t) {
    foo = (t==0)? 1: 2;
}

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
    int x = 0xdeadbeef;
    volatile int *y = &yb;
    int i;
    int t = atoi(argv[1]);
    blah(t);
    if (t == 0) {
        printf("Using the & method\n");
        for (i=0;i<100000000;++i) *y=x & foo;
    } else {
        printf("Using the %% method\n");
        for (i=0;i<100000000;++i) *y=x % foo;
    }
    return 0;
}

[download]
NOTES: x is initialized with a non-zero value. On x86 I have noticed sometimes ALU/Mult operations on zero-valued inputs can be significantly faster than on non-zero inputs.

y is a volatile pointer to prevent gcc from optimizing the loops away, if it was so inclined.

'foo' is not a constant to prevent gcc from optimizing an odd/even test.

'foo' is initialized in a non-static function to prevent gcc from (if it could/would do this) optimizing the loops to odd/even test anyway.

We do 100 million iterations, to drown out any noise.

Running on an unloaded 933Mhz P-III: 

% time ./foo 0
Using the & method
0.77user 0.01system 0:00.80elapsed 96%CPU (blah blah)

% time ./foo 1
Using the % method
4.29user 0.00system 0:04.43elapsed 96%CPU (blah blah)

[download]

I ran the tests about 10 times each and the results are about the same.

Now if you are just doing a odd-even test, gcc will likely be able to optimize it for you to the point that you can use whatever method you want and it will be fast. If you programming on a DSP, however, or maybe in a super-high-speed driver or something, you'd want to make sure you use the fast version, cuz the compiler in that case likely can't help you (or you don't want it to).

And in Perl anyway, you are operating many levels about the underlying machine architecture. % vs & is the least of your worries speed-wise.

In reply to Re: Re: Testing a number for oddness by Anonymous Monk
in thread Testing a number for oddness by Falkkin

Title:
Use:  <p> text here (a paragraph) </p>
and:  <code> code here </code>
to format your post, it's "PerlMonks-approved HTML":


  • Posts are HTML formatted. Put <p> </p> tags around your paragraphs. Put <code> </code> tags around your code and data!
  • Titles consisting of a single word are discouraged, and in most cases are disallowed outright.
  • Read Where should I post X? if you're not absolutely sure you're posting in the right place.
  • Please read these before you post! —
  • Posts may use any of the Perl Monks Approved HTML tags:
    a, abbr, b, big, blockquote, br, caption, center, col, colgroup, dd, del, details, div, dl, dt, em, font, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, hr, i, ins, li, ol, p, pre, readmore, small, span, spoiler, strike, strong, sub, summary, sup, table, tbody, td, tfoot, th, thead, tr, tt, u, ul, wbr
  • You may need to use entities for some characters, as follows. (Exception: Within code tags, you can put the characters literally.)
            For:     Use:
    & &amp;
    < &lt;
    > &gt;
    [ &#91;
    ] &#93;
  • Link using PerlMonks shortcuts! What shortcuts can I use for linking?
  • See Writeup Formatting Tips and other pages linked from there for more info.