我有这样的代码:
good = [x for x in mylist if x in goodvals]
bad = [x for x in mylist if x not in goodvals]
目标是根据mylist的内容是否满足条件,将它们拆分为另外两个列表。
我怎样才能做得更优雅呢?我能避免在mylist上做两个单独的迭代吗?我可以通过这样做来提高性能吗?
我有这样的代码:
good = [x for x in mylist if x in goodvals]
bad = [x for x in mylist if x not in goodvals]
目标是根据mylist的内容是否满足条件,将它们拆分为另外两个列表。
我怎样才能做得更优雅呢?我能避免在mylist上做两个单独的迭代吗?我可以通过这样做来提高性能吗?
当前回答
就我个人而言,我喜欢你引用的版本,假设你已经有了一个好的列表。如果没有,就像这样:
good = filter(lambda x: is_good(x), mylist)
bad = filter(lambda x: not is_good(x), mylist)
当然,这真的非常类似于使用列表理解,就像你最初做的,但用一个函数而不是一个查找:
good = [x for x in mylist if is_good(x)]
bad = [x for x in mylist if not is_good(x)]
总的来说,我发现列表推导式的美学非常令人满意。当然,如果您实际上不需要保留顺序,也不需要重复,那么在集合上使用交集和差分方法也会很好。
其他回答
第一步(pre-OP-edit):使用集合:
mylist = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7]
goodvals = [1,3,7,8,9]
myset = set(mylist)
goodset = set(goodvals)
print list(myset.intersection(goodset)) # [1, 3, 7]
print list(myset.difference(goodset)) # [2, 4, 5, 6]
这对可读性(IMHO)和性能都有好处。
第二步(post-OP-edit):
创建一个好的扩展列表:
IMAGE_TYPES = set(['.jpg','.jpeg','.gif','.bmp','.png'])
这将提高性能。否则,你现在的情况在我看来还不错。
简单的生成器版本,在内存中保存尽可能少的值,并且只调用pred一次:
from collections import deque
from typing import Callable, TypeVar, Iterable
_T = TypeVar('_T')
def iter_split(pred: Callable[[_T], bool],
iterable: Iterable[_T]) -> tuple[Iterable[_T], Iterable[_T]]:
"""Split an iterable into two iterables based on a predicate.
The predicate will only be called once per element.
Returns:
A tuple of two iterables, the first containing all elements for which
the predicate returned True, the second containing all elements for
which the predicate returned False.
"""
iterator = iter(iterable)
true_values: deque[_T] = deque()
false_values: deque[_T] = deque()
def true_generator():
while True:
while true_values:
yield true_values.popleft()
for item in iterator:
if pred(item):
yield item
break
false_values.append(item)
else:
break
def false_generator():
while True:
while false_values:
yield false_values.popleft()
for item in iterator:
if not pred(item):
yield item
break
true_values.append(item)
else:
break
return true_generator(), false_generator()
images = [f for f in files if f[2].lower() in IMAGE_TYPES]
anims = [f for f in files if f not in images]
当条件较长时很好,例如在您的示例中。读者不需要弄清楚否定条件以及它是否适用于所有其他情况。
就我个人而言,我喜欢你引用的版本,假设你已经有了一个好的列表。如果没有,就像这样:
good = filter(lambda x: is_good(x), mylist)
bad = filter(lambda x: not is_good(x), mylist)
当然,这真的非常类似于使用列表理解,就像你最初做的,但用一个函数而不是一个查找:
good = [x for x in mylist if is_good(x)]
bad = [x for x in mylist if not is_good(x)]
总的来说,我发现列表推导式的美学非常令人满意。当然,如果您实际上不需要保留顺序,也不需要重复,那么在集合上使用交集和差分方法也会很好。
这个问题已经有很多答案了,但似乎都不如我最喜欢的解决这个问题的方法,这种方法只遍历和测试每个项目一次,并使用列表理解的速度来构建两个输出列表之一,因此它只需要使用相对较慢的附加来构建一个输出列表:
bad = []
good = [x for x in mylist if x in goodvals or bad.append(x)]
In my answer to a similar question, I explain how this approach works (a combination of Python's greedy evaluation of or refraining from executing the append for "good" items, and append returning a false-like value which leaves the if condition false for "bad" items), and I show timeit results indicating that this approach outcompetes alternatives like those suggested here, especially in cases where the majority of items will go into the list built by list-comprehension (in this case, the good list).