这是另一个选项，对于长列表，比len(set(x))==1快(使用短路)

def constantList(x):
    return x and [x[0]]*len(x) == x

将您的输入转换为一个集:

len(set(the_list)) <= 1

使用set可以删除所有重复的元素。<= 1使它在输入为空时正确地返回True。

这要求输入中的所有元素都是可哈希的。例如，如果传入一个列表的列表，就会得到一个TypeError。

不管怎样，这是最近在python想法邮件列表中出现的。事实证明，已经有一个itertools配方可以做到这一点

def all_equal(iterable):
    "Returns True if all the elements are equal to each other"
    g = groupby(iterable)
    return next(g, True) and not next(g, False)

据说它的性能非常好，有一些不错的属性。

短路:一旦发现第一个不相等的项，它就会停止从可迭代对象中消费项目。 不要求项是可哈希的。 它是懒惰的，只需要O(1)个额外的内存来进行检查。

换句话说，我不能把提出这个解决方案的功劳占为己有，甚至我也不能把找到它的功劳占为己有。

或者使用numpy的diff方法:

import numpy as np
def allthesame(l):
    return np.all(np.diff(l)==0)

并呼吁:

print(allthesame([1,1,1]))

输出:

True

我怀疑这是“最python化的”，但类似于:

>>> falseList = [1,2,3,4]
>>> trueList = [1, 1, 1]
>>> 
>>> def testList(list):
...   for item in list[1:]:
...     if item != list[0]:
...       return False
...   return True
... 
>>> testList(falseList)
False
>>> testList(trueList)
True

会成功的。

出现使用itertools。Groupby(参见itertools食谱):

from itertools import groupby

def all_equal(iterable):
    g = groupby(iterable)
    return next(g, True) and not next(g, False)

或不带groupby:

def all_equal(iterator):
    iterator = iter(iterator)
    try:
        first = next(iterator)
    except StopIteration:
        return True
    return all(first == x for x in iterator)

您可以考虑使用许多其他的一行程序:

Converting the input to a set and checking that it only has one or zero (in case the input is empty) items def all_equal2(iterator): return len(set(iterator)) <= 1 Comparing against the input list without the first item def all_equal3(lst): return lst[:-1] == lst[1:] Counting how many times the first item appears in the list def all_equal_ivo(lst): return not lst or lst.count(lst[0]) == len(lst) Comparing against a list of the first element repeated def all_equal_6502(lst): return not lst or [lst[0]]*len(lst) == lst

但它们也有一些缺点，即:

all_equal and all_equal2 can use any iterators, but the others must take a sequence input, typically concrete containers like a list or tuple. all_equal and all_equal3 stop as soon as a difference is found (what is called "short circuit"), whereas all the alternatives require iterating over the entire list, even if you can tell that the answer is False just by looking at the first two elements. In all_equal2 the content must be hashable. A list of lists will raise a TypeError for example. all_equal2 (in the worst case) and all_equal_6502 create a copy of the list, meaning you need to use double the memory.

在Python 3.9中，使用perfplot，我们得到这些计时(越低的Runtime [s]越好):