In C++, splitting a string by a delimiter is a common task, especially when parsing user input or working with formatted data. One of the simplest methods to achieve this is by using the strtok() function from the C standard library.

Let's walk through how you can split a string using multiple delimiters, such as commas and semicolons, with an example.

#include <iostream>
#include <cstring>
using namespace std;

int main() {
    string str;
    cin >> str;

    char str_chr[str.length() + 1];
    strcpy(str_chr, str.c_str());

    char *token = strtok(str_chr, ",;");  // Splitting using ',' and ';'

    while (token != NULL) {
        cout << token << endl;
        token = strtok(NULL, ",;");
    }

    return 0;
}

Explanation:

1. Convert to C-style String: The strtok() function works with C-style strings (character arrays), so we need to convert the C++ string (std::string) to a character array, it can be done using strcpy().

2. The strtok() function takes two parameters: the string to split and a string of delimiter characters (in this case, "," and ";"). The function splits the string at every occurrence of any of the delimiters.

3. The while loop continues extracting tokens until strtok() returns NULL, indicating that there are no more tokens left to extract.

Example Input/Output:

Input:
apple,banana;cherry

Output:
apple
banana
cherry

Time Complexity: O(n)

In programming, “++i” and “i++” are both used to increment the value of a variable by 1, but the difference is in the order in which the increment operation and the use of the variable occur.

When it comes to the difference between “++i” and “i++”, it’s important to understand how each operator works. “++i” is known as the pre-increment operator, which increments the value of ‘i’ immediately and returns the incremented value. On the other hand, “i++” is known as the post-increment operator, which increments the value of ‘i’ but returns the original value that ‘i’ held before being incremented.

Example:

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

void print(int x)
{
    cout << x << endl;
}

int main()
{
    int n = 5;

    print(n++);
    print(n);
    print(++n);

    return 0;
}

/* Output:
5
6
7
*/

In terms of performance, “++i” is sometimes faster than “i++” and is never slower than "i++". For intrinsic types like int, it doesn’t matter: “++i” and “i++” are the same speed. However, for class types like iterators, “++i” very well might be faster than “i++” since the latter might make a copy of the this object.

In conclusion, while there may be some performance differences between “++i” and “i++”, it’s generally recommended to use “++i” unless you specifically want the postfix semantics.

I hope this information will be helpful to you.

Experimental time complexity analysis is a way to estimate the time complexity of an algorithm by running it on various inputs and measuring the running time. Here is an example of how to perform experimental time complexity analysis in C++:

#include <iostream>
#include <chrono>
using namespace std;
using namespace std::chrono;

void someAlgorithm(int n) {
  // code for the algorithm
}

int main() {
  int n;
  cin >> n;

  auto start = high_resolution_clock::now();
  someAlgorithm(n);
  auto stop = high_resolution_clock::now();
  auto duration = duration_cast<microseconds>(stop &mdash; start);

  cout << "Time taken by function: "
       << duration.count() << " microseconds" << endl;
  return 0;
}

In this example, we have a function someAlgorithm() that takes an input parameter n. We use the library to measure the running time of the function by recording the start time and end time using high_resolution_clock::now(), and then calculating the duration using duration_cast(stop — start).

To perform the experimental time complexity analysis, we can run the someAlgorithm() function with various input sizes (for example, 10, 100, 1000, 10000, etc.), and record the corresponding running times. We can then plot the running times against the input sizes on a graph, and try to fit a curve to the data. The shape of the curve can give us an idea of the time complexity of the algorithm. For example, if the curve looks linear, then the algorithm is likely to have linear time complexity. If the curve looks quadratic, then the algorithm is likely to have quadratic time complexity.

However, it is important to note that experimental time complexity analysis is not a rigorous method and should be used with caution.