On 2011-06-11 16:43, renoir wrote: > Ok. > > So i can do: > > x = cast(byte)(x + y); > x = (x + y) & 0xff; > > is there any difference in terms of performance?
That would depend entirely on the optimizer. I believe that the cast is guaranteed to cost nothing. The & might cost something if you don't compile with -O, but even then cost is very small. Ultimately, they're probably the same, but it depends on what exactly the compiler does. Personally, I much prefer the cast because it's more immediately clear to me what you're doing. But if someone uses the & 0xff trick all the time, then that's probably quite clear to them as well. - Jonathan M Davis
