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
有时候你并不需要清单上的另一半。 例如:
import sys
from itertools import ifilter
trustedPeople = sys.argv[1].split(',')
newName = sys.argv[2]
myFriends = ifilter(lambda x: x.startswith('Shi'), trustedPeople)
print '%s is %smy friend.' % (newName, newName not in myFriends 'not ' or '')
其他回答
good.append(x) if x in goodvals else bad.append(x)
来自@dansalmo的这个优雅简洁的回答被埋没在评论中,所以我只是把它作为一个答案转发到这里,这样它就能得到应有的重视,尤其是对新读者来说。
完整的例子:
good, bad = [], []
for x in my_list:
good.append(x) if x in goodvals else bad.append(x)
有时候,列表理解并不是最好的选择!
我根据人们对这个话题的回答做了一个小测试,在一个随机生成的列表上测试。以下是列表的生成(可能有更好的方法,但这不是重点):
good_list = ('.jpg','.jpeg','.gif','.bmp','.png')
import random
import string
my_origin_list = []
for i in xrange(10000):
fname = ''.join(random.choice(string.lowercase) for i in range(random.randrange(10)))
if random.getrandbits(1):
fext = random.choice(good_list)
else:
fext = "." + ''.join(random.choice(string.lowercase) for i in range(3))
my_origin_list.append((fname + fext, random.randrange(1000), fext))
好了
# Parand
def f1():
return [e for e in my_origin_list if e[2] in good_list], [e for e in my_origin_list if not e[2] in good_list]
# dbr
def f2():
a, b = list(), list()
for e in my_origin_list:
if e[2] in good_list:
a.append(e)
else:
b.append(e)
return a, b
# John La Rooy
def f3():
a, b = list(), list()
for e in my_origin_list:
(b, a)[e[2] in good_list].append(e)
return a, b
# Ants Aasma
def f4():
l1, l2 = tee((e[2] in good_list, e) for e in my_origin_list)
return [i for p, i in l1 if p], [i for p, i in l2 if not p]
# My personal way to do
def f5():
a, b = zip(*[(e, None) if e[2] in good_list else (None, e) for e in my_origin_list])
return list(filter(None, a)), list(filter(None, b))
# BJ Homer
def f6():
return filter(lambda e: e[2] in good_list, my_origin_list), filter(lambda e: not e[2] in good_list, my_origin_list)
使用cmpthese函数,最好的结果是dbr答案:
f1 204/s -- -5% -14% -15% -20% -26%
f6 215/s 6% -- -9% -11% -16% -22%
f3 237/s 16% 10% -- -2% -7% -14%
f4 240/s 18% 12% 2% -- -6% -13%
f5 255/s 25% 18% 8% 6% -- -8%
f2 277/s 36% 29% 17% 15% 9% --
为了提高性能,请尝试itertools。
itertools模块标准化了一组快速、内存高效的核心工具,这些工具单独使用或组合使用都很有用。它们一起构成了一个“迭代器代数”,使得用纯Python简洁有效地构造专门的工具成为可能。
出现看到itertools。过滤器或imap。
itertools。iterable ifilter(谓词) 创建一个迭代器,从iterable中过滤元素,只返回谓词为True的元素
之前的答案似乎并不能满足我所有的四种强迫症:
尽可能的懒惰, 只对原始Iterable求值一次 每个项只计算谓词一次 提供良好的类型注释(适用于python 3.7)
我的解决方案并不漂亮,我不认为我可以推荐使用它,但它是:
def iter_split_on_predicate(predicate: Callable[[T], bool], iterable: Iterable[T]) -> Tuple[Iterator[T], Iterator[T]]:
deque_predicate_true = deque()
deque_predicate_false = deque()
# define a generator function to consume the input iterable
# the Predicate is evaluated once per item, added to the appropriate deque, and the predicate result it yielded
def shared_generator(definitely_an_iterator):
for item in definitely_an_iterator:
print("Evaluate predicate.")
if predicate(item):
deque_predicate_true.appendleft(item)
yield True
else:
deque_predicate_false.appendleft(item)
yield False
# consume input iterable only once,
# converting to an iterator with the iter() function if necessary. Probably this conversion is unnecessary
shared_gen = shared_generator(
iterable if isinstance(iterable, collections.abc.Iterator) else iter(iterable)
)
# define a generator function for each predicate outcome and queue
def iter_for(predicate_value, hold_queue):
def consume_shared_generator_until_hold_queue_contains_something():
if not hold_queue:
try:
while next(shared_gen) != predicate_value:
pass
except:
pass
consume_shared_generator_until_hold_queue_contains_something()
while hold_queue:
print("Yield where predicate is "+str(predicate_value))
yield hold_queue.pop()
consume_shared_generator_until_hold_queue_contains_something()
# return a tuple of two generators
return iter_for(predicate_value=True, hold_queue=deque_predicate_true), iter_for(predicate_value=False, hold_queue=deque_predicate_false)
用下面的测试,我们从print语句中得到如下输出:
t,f = iter_split_on_predicate(lambda item:item>=10,[1,2,3,10,11,12,4,5,6,13,14,15])
print(list(zip(t,f)))
# Evaluate predicate.
# Evaluate predicate.
# Evaluate predicate.
# Evaluate predicate.
# Yield where predicate is True
# Yield where predicate is False
# Evaluate predicate.
# Yield where predicate is True
# Yield where predicate is False
# Evaluate predicate.
# Yield where predicate is True
# Yield where predicate is False
# Evaluate predicate.
# Evaluate predicate.
# Evaluate predicate.
# Evaluate predicate.
# Yield where predicate is True
# Yield where predicate is False
# Evaluate predicate.
# Yield where predicate is True
# Yield where predicate is False
# Evaluate predicate.
# Yield where predicate is True
# Yield where predicate is False
# [(10, 1), (11, 2), (12, 3), (13, 4), (14, 5), (15, 6)]
所有提出的解决方案的问题是,它将扫描和应用过滤功能两次。我会做一个简单的小函数,像这样:
def split_into_two_lists(lst, f):
a = []
b = []
for elem in lst:
if f(elem):
a.append(elem)
else:
b.append(elem)
return a, b
这样你就不会重复处理任何东西,也不会重复代码。