Link Details

> One guy asked a question on a Java Forum: which operation is faster - post-increment or pre-increment.

Must have been a C++ developer ...

it sounds more a .Net developer than a C++ in my view:)

.Net languages have operator overloading?? I must have missed something ...

just wish it had..

++x is faster than x++, because it does a little less. If it's side-effect-free (i.e. a single statement) it can and will be compiled to the same code. If the code relies on those side-effects, it's probably a bit ugly. (E.g. int[]a={1,2,3}; for(int i=a.length;i-->0;)System.out.println(a[i]);)

By the way that benchmark is totally flawed. :)

Yeah, several flaws in both the benchmarking and the general reasoning surrounding it. I'm surprised this article was voted up like it way.

in normal case if we use ++x and x++,both work same.But in classes,that overload the ++ operator,it's faster to use the ++x rather than x++.
http://www.teethwhiteninginstructions.com