我有一个Python脚本，它把一个整数列表作为输入，我需要一次处理四个整数。不幸的是，我无法控制输入，否则我将它作为一个四元素元组列表传入。目前，我以这种方式迭代它:
for i in range(0, len(ints), 4):
# dummy op for example code
foo += ints[i] * ints[i + 1] + ints[i + 2] * ints[i + 3]
不过，它看起来很像“C-think”，这让我怀疑有一种更python的方式来处理这种情况。该列表在迭代后被丢弃，因此不需要保留。也许这样会更好?
while ints:
foo += ints[0] * ints[1] + ints[2] * ints[3]
ints[0:4] = []
不过，感觉还是不太对。: - /
相关问题:在Python中如何将列表分割成大小均匀的块?
当前回答
def chunker(iterable, n):
"""Yield iterable in chunk sizes.
>>> chunks = chunker('ABCDEF', n=4)
>>> chunks.next()
['A', 'B', 'C', 'D']
>>> chunks.next()
['E', 'F']
"""
it = iter(iterable)
while True:
chunk = []
for i in range(n):
try:
chunk.append(next(it))
except StopIteration:
yield chunk
raise StopIteration
yield chunk
if __name__ == '__main__':
import doctest
doctest.testmod()
其他回答
下面是我的go works on lists,iter和range…懒洋洋地:
def chunker(it,size):
rv = []
for i,el in enumerate(it,1) :
rv.append(el)
if i % size == 0 :
yield rv
rv = []
if rv : yield rv
几乎变成了一句俏皮话;(
In [95]: list(chunker(range(9),2) )
Out[95]: [[0, 1], [2, 3], [4, 5], [6, 7], [8]]
In [96]: list(chunker([1,2,3,4,5],2) )
Out[96]: [[1, 2], [3, 4], [5]]
In [97]: list(chunker(iter(range(9)),2) )
Out[97]: [[0, 1], [2, 3], [4, 5], [6, 7], [8]]
In [98]: list(chunker(range(9),25) )
Out[98]: [[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8]]
In [99]: list(chunker(range(9),1) )
Out[99]: [[0], [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]]
In [101]: %timeit list(chunker(range(101),2) )
11.3 µs ± 68.2 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100000 loops each)
我喜欢这种方法。它感觉简单而不神奇，支持所有可迭代类型，并且不需要导入。
def chunk_iter(iterable, chunk_size):
it = iter(iterable)
while True:
chunk = tuple(next(it) for _ in range(chunk_size))
if not chunk:
break
yield chunk
我从来不想填充我的块，所以这个要求是必要的。我发现在任何可迭代对象上工作的能力也是必需的。鉴于此，我决定扩展公认的答案，https://stackoverflow.com/a/434411/1074659。
如果由于需要比较和筛选填充值而不需要填充，则这种方法的性能会受到轻微的影响。然而，对于大块大小，这个实用程序是非常高性能的。
#!/usr/bin/env python3
from itertools import zip_longest
_UNDEFINED = object()
def chunker(iterable, chunksize, fillvalue=_UNDEFINED):
"""
Collect data into chunks and optionally pad it.
Performance worsens as `chunksize` approaches 1.
Inspired by:
https://docs.python.org/3/library/itertools.html#itertools-recipes
"""
args = [iter(iterable)] * chunksize
chunks = zip_longest(*args, fillvalue=fillvalue)
yield from (
filter(lambda val: val is not _UNDEFINED, chunk)
if chunk[-1] is _UNDEFINED
else chunk
for chunk in chunks
) if fillvalue is _UNDEFINED else chunks
似乎没有一个漂亮的方法来做到这一点。下面是一个有很多方法的页面，包括:
def split_seq(seq, size):
newseq = []
splitsize = 1.0/size*len(seq)
for i in range(size):
newseq.append(seq[int(round(i*splitsize)):int(round((i+1)*splitsize))])
return newseq
在Python 3.8中，您可以使用walrus操作符和itertools.islice。
from itertools import islice
list_ = [i for i in range(10, 100)]
def chunker(it, size):
iterator = iter(it)
while chunk := list(islice(iterator, size)):
print(chunk)
In [2]: chunker(list_, 10)
[10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]
[20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29]
[30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39]
[40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49]
[50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59]
[60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69]
[70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79]
[80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89]
[90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99]
