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。

如果列表大小相同，可以使用zip()将它们组合成4元组列表。例如:

# Four lists of four elements each.

l1 = range(0, 4)
l2 = range(4, 8)
l3 = range(8, 12)
l4 = range(12, 16)

for i1, i2, i3, i4 in zip(l1, l2, l3, l4):
    ...

下面是zip()函数生成的内容:

>>> print l1
[0, 1, 2, 3]
>>> print l2
[4, 5, 6, 7]
>>> print l3
[8, 9, 10, 11]
>>> print l4
[12, 13, 14, 15]
>>> print zip(l1, l2, l3, l4)
[(0, 4, 8, 12), (1, 5, 9, 13), (2, 6, 10, 14), (3, 7, 11, 15)]

如果列表很大，并且您不想将它们组合成一个更大的列表，请使用itertools.izip()，它会生成一个迭代器，而不是一个列表。

from itertools import izip

for i1, i2, i3, i4 in izip(l1, l2, l3, l4):
    ...

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:
    ...

要避免所有到列表的转换，请导入itertools和:

>>> for k, g in itertools.groupby(xrange(35), lambda x: x/10):
...     list(g)

生产:

... 
0 [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
1 [10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]
2 [20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]
3 [30, 31, 32, 33, 34]
>>> 

我检查了groupby，它不转换为列表或使用len，所以我(认为)这将延迟每个值的解析，直到它实际使用。不幸的是，没有一个现成的答案(在这个时候)似乎提供了这种变化。

显然，如果你需要依次处理每一项，在g上嵌套一个for循环:

for k,g in itertools.groupby(xrange(35), lambda x: x/10):
    for i in g:
       # do what you need to do with individual items
    # now do what you need to do with the whole group

我对此特别感兴趣的是需要消耗一个生成器，以批量提交最多1000个更改到gmail API:

    messages = a_generator_which_would_not_be_smart_as_a_list
    for idx, batch in groupby(messages, lambda x: x/1000):
        batch_request = BatchHttpRequest()
        for message in batch:
            batch_request.add(self.service.users().messages().modify(userId='me', id=message['id'], body=msg_labels))
        http = httplib2.Http()
        self.credentials.authorize(http)
        batch_request.execute(http=http)

另一种方法是使用双参数形式的iter:

from itertools import islice

def group(it, size):
    it = iter(it)
    return iter(lambda: tuple(islice(it, size)), ())

这可以很容易地适应使用填充(这类似于Markus Jarderot的答案):

from itertools import islice, chain, repeat

def group_pad(it, size, pad=None):
    it = chain(iter(it), repeat(pad))
    return iter(lambda: tuple(islice(it, size)), (pad,) * size)

这些甚至可以组合为可选的填充:

_no_pad = object()
def group(it, size, pad=_no_pad):
    if pad == _no_pad:
        it = iter(it)
        sentinel = ()
    else:
        it = chain(iter(it), repeat(pad))
        sentinel = (pad,) * size
    return iter(lambda: tuple(islice(it, size)), sentinel)

下面是一个支持生成器的无导入chunker:

def chunks(seq, size):
    it = iter(seq)
    while True:
        ret = tuple(next(it) for _ in range(size))
        if len(ret) == size:
            yield ret
        else:
            raise StopIteration()

使用示例:

>>> def foo():
...     i = 0
...     while True:
...         i += 1
...         yield i
...
>>> c = chunks(foo(), 3)
>>> c.next()
(1, 2, 3)
>>> c.next()
(4, 5, 6)
>>> list(chunks('abcdefg', 2))
[('a', 'b'), ('c', 'd'), ('e', 'f')]