如果你不介意使用外部包，你可以使用iteration_utilities。Grouper from iteration_utilities它支持所有可迭代对象(不仅仅是序列):

from iteration_utilities import grouper
seq = list(range(20))
for group in grouper(seq, 4):
    print(group)

打印:

(0, 1, 2, 3)
(4, 5, 6, 7)
(8, 9, 10, 11)
(12, 13, 14, 15)
(16, 17, 18, 19)

如果长度不是组大小的倍数，它还支持填充(不完整的最后一组)或截断(丢弃不完整的最后一组)最后一个:

from iteration_utilities import grouper
seq = list(range(17))
for group in grouper(seq, 4):
    print(group)
# (0, 1, 2, 3)
# (4, 5, 6, 7)
# (8, 9, 10, 11)
# (12, 13, 14, 15)
# (16,)

for group in grouper(seq, 4, fillvalue=None):
    print(group)
# (0, 1, 2, 3)
# (4, 5, 6, 7)
# (8, 9, 10, 11)
# (12, 13, 14, 15)
# (16, None, None, None)

for group in grouper(seq, 4, truncate=True):
    print(group)
# (0, 1, 2, 3)
# (4, 5, 6, 7)
# (8, 9, 10, 11)
# (12, 13, 14, 15)

基准

我还决定比较上面提到的几种方法的运行时间。这是一个对数-对数图，根据不同大小的列表将“10”个元素分组。对于定性结果:较低意味着更快:

至少在这个基准测试中iteration_utilities。石斑鱼表现最好。接着是Craz。

基准是用simple_benchmark1创建的。运行这个基准测试的代码是:

import iteration_utilities
import itertools
from itertools import zip_longest

def consume_all(it):
    return iteration_utilities.consume(it, None)

import simple_benchmark
b = simple_benchmark.BenchmarkBuilder()

@b.add_function()
def grouper(l, n):
    return consume_all(iteration_utilities.grouper(l, n))

def Craz_inner(iterable, n, fillvalue=None):
    args = [iter(iterable)] * n
    return zip_longest(*args, fillvalue=fillvalue)

@b.add_function()
def Craz(iterable, n, fillvalue=None):
    return consume_all(Craz_inner(iterable, n, fillvalue))

def nosklo_inner(seq, size):
    return (seq[pos:pos + size] for pos in range(0, len(seq), size))

@b.add_function()
def nosklo(seq, size):
    return consume_all(nosklo_inner(seq, size))

def SLott_inner(ints, chunk_size):
    for i in range(0, len(ints), chunk_size):
        yield ints[i:i+chunk_size]

@b.add_function()
def SLott(ints, chunk_size):
    return consume_all(SLott_inner(ints, chunk_size))

def MarkusJarderot1_inner(iterable,size):
    it = iter(iterable)
    chunk = tuple(itertools.islice(it,size))
    while chunk:
        yield chunk
        chunk = tuple(itertools.islice(it,size))

@b.add_function()
def MarkusJarderot1(iterable,size):
    return consume_all(MarkusJarderot1_inner(iterable,size))

def MarkusJarderot2_inner(iterable,size,filler=None):
    it = itertools.chain(iterable,itertools.repeat(filler,size-1))
    chunk = tuple(itertools.islice(it,size))
    while len(chunk) == size:
        yield chunk
        chunk = tuple(itertools.islice(it,size))

@b.add_function()
def MarkusJarderot2(iterable,size):
    return consume_all(MarkusJarderot2_inner(iterable,size))

@b.add_arguments()
def argument_provider():
    for exp in range(2, 20):
        size = 2**exp
        yield size, simple_benchmark.MultiArgument([[0] * size, 10])

r = b.run()

1免责声明:我是iteration_utilities和simple_benchmark库的作者。

这里非常python化(也可以内联split_groups函数体)

import itertools
def split_groups(iter_in, group_size):
    return ((x for _, x in item) for _, item in itertools.groupby(enumerate(iter_in), key=lambda x: x[0] // group_size))

for x, y, z, w in split_groups(range(16), 4):
    foo += x * y + z * w

使用小的函数和东西真的不吸引我;我更喜欢使用切片:

data = [...]
chunk_size = 10000 # or whatever
chunks = [data[i:i+chunk_size] for i in xrange(0,len(data),chunk_size)]
for chunk in chunks:
    ...

这个答案拆分了一个字符串列表，f.ex。达到符合pep8线长的要求:

def split(what, target_length=79):
    '''splits list of strings into sublists, each 
    having string length at most 79'''
    out = [[]]
    while what:
        if len("', '".join(out[-1])) + len(what[0]) < target_length:
            out[-1].append(what.pop(0))
        else:
            if not out[-1]: # string longer than target_length
                out[-1] = [what.pop(0)]
            out.append([])
    return out

使用

>>> split(['deferred_income', 'long_term_incentive', 'restricted_stock_deferred', 'shared_receipt_with_poi', 'loan_advances', 'from_messages', 'other', 'director_fees', 'bonus', 'total_stock_value', 'from_poi_to_this_person', 'from_this_person_to_poi', 'restricted_stock', 'salary', 'total_payments', 'exercised_stock_options'], 75)
[['deferred_income', 'long_term_incentive', 'restricted_stock_deferred'], ['shared_receipt_with_poi', 'loan_advances', 'from_messages', 'other'], ['director_fees', 'bonus', 'total_stock_value', 'from_poi_to_this_person'], ['from_this_person_to_poi', 'restricted_stock', 'salary', 'total_payments'], ['exercised_stock_options']]

这个问题的理想解决方案是使用迭代器(而不仅仅是序列)。它还应该是快速的。

这是itertools文档提供的解决方案:

def grouper(n, iterable, fillvalue=None):
    #"grouper(3, 'ABCDEFG', 'x') --> ABC DEF Gxx"
    args = [iter(iterable)] * n
    return itertools.izip_longest(fillvalue=fillvalue, *args)

在我的mac book air上使用ipython的%timeit，我每次循环得到47.5 us。

然而，这真的不适合我，因为结果被填充为偶数大小的组。没有填充的解决方案稍微复杂一些。最天真的解决方案可能是:

def grouper(size, iterable):
    i = iter(iterable)
    while True:
        out = []
        try:
            for _ in range(size):
                out.append(i.next())
        except StopIteration:
            yield out
            break
        
        yield out

简单，但相当慢:每循环693个

我能想到的最好的解决方案是使用islice进行内循环:

def grouper(size, iterable):
    it = iter(iterable)
    while True:
        group = tuple(itertools.islice(it, None, size))
        if not group:
            break
        yield group

对于同样的数据集，我每循环得到305 us。

由于无法更快地得到一个纯粹的解决方案，我提供了以下解决方案，但有一个重要的警告:如果您的输入数据中有filldata的实例，则可能会得到错误的答案。

def grouper(n, iterable, fillvalue=None):
    #"grouper(3, 'ABCDEFG', 'x') --> ABC DEF Gxx"
    args = [iter(iterable)] * n
    # itertools.zip_longest on Python 3
    for x in itertools.izip_longest(*args, fillvalue=fillvalue):
        if x[-1] is fillvalue:
            yield tuple(v for v in x if v is not fillvalue)
        else:
            yield x

我真的不喜欢这个答案，但它明显更快。每回路124 us

from itertools import izip_longest

def chunker(iterable, chunksize, filler):
    return izip_longest(*[iter(iterable)]*chunksize, fillvalue=filler)