Sorry, I was thinking something else. Code 1 should be faster since arrays are stored in row-major fashion, the entire row will fit in cache, and accessing sequentially in the row would be faster because of higher cache hits than Code 2.
On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Gaurav Menghani <[email protected]> wrote: > If the dimensions are same, both will execute equally fast. > > On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Kamakshii Aggarwal > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> which code executes faster? >> code1:- for(i=0;i<n;i++) >> for(j=0;j<n;j++) >> large_array[i][j]=0; >> code2:- for(j=0;j<n;j++) >> for(i=0;i<n;i++) >> large_array[i][j]=0; >> >> >> >> -- >> Regards, >> Kamakshi >> [email protected] >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Algorithm Geeks" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]. >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en. >> > > > > -- > Gaurav Menghani > -- Gaurav Menghani -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Algorithm Geeks" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/algogeeks?hl=en.
