使用itertools的更多版本。groupby，我发现它比原来的更清晰(下面有更多关于它的信息):

def all_equal(iterable):
    g = groupby(iterable)
    return not any(g) or not any(g)

def all_equal(iterable):
    g = groupby(iterable)
    next(g, None)
    return not next(g, False)

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

以下是来自Itertools Recipes的原始版本:

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

注意，下一个(g, True)总是True(它不是一个非空元组就是True)。这意味着它的值不重要。它的执行纯粹是为了推进groupby迭代器。但是在返回表达式中包含它会导致读者认为它的值在那里被使用。因为它没有，我发现这是误导和不必要的复杂。我上面的第二个版本将next(g, True)视为它的实际用途，作为一个我们不关心其值的语句。

我的第三个版本走了一个不同的方向，并使用了第一个next的值(g, False)。如果根本没有第一个组(即，如果给定的可迭代对象为“空”)，则该解决方案立即返回结果，甚至不检查是否有第二个组。

我的第一个解决方案基本上和第三个一样，只是使用任何一个。两种解决方案都读作“所有元素都是相等的……”没有第一组，也没有第二组。”

基准测试结果(虽然速度并不是我在这里的重点，但清晰才是重点，在实践中，如果有许多相等的值，大多数时间可能由组自己花费，减少了这些差异的影响):

Python 3.10.4 on my Windows laptop:

iterable = ()
 914 ns   914 ns   916 ns  use_first_any
 917 ns   925 ns   925 ns  use_first_next
1074 ns  1075 ns  1075 ns  next_as_statement
1081 ns  1083 ns  1084 ns  original

iterable = (1,)
1290 ns  1290 ns  1291 ns  next_as_statement
1303 ns  1307 ns  1307 ns  use_first_next
1306 ns  1307 ns  1309 ns  use_first_any
1318 ns  1319 ns  1320 ns  original

iterable = (1, 2)
1463 ns  1464 ns  1467 ns  use_first_any
1463 ns  1463 ns  1467 ns  next_as_statement
1477 ns  1479 ns  1481 ns  use_first_next
1487 ns  1489 ns  1492 ns  original

Python 3.10.4 on a Debian Google Compute Engine instance:

iterable = ()
 234 ns   234 ns   234 ns  use_first_any
 234 ns   235 ns   235 ns  use_first_next
 264 ns   264 ns   264 ns  next_as_statement
 265 ns   265 ns   265 ns  original

iterable = (1,)
 308 ns   308 ns   308 ns  next_as_statement
 315 ns   315 ns   315 ns  original
 316 ns   316 ns   317 ns  use_first_any
 317 ns   317 ns   317 ns  use_first_next

iterable = (1, 2)
 361 ns   361 ns   361 ns  next_as_statement
 367 ns   367 ns   367 ns  original
 384 ns   385 ns   385 ns  use_first_next
 386 ns   387 ns   387 ns  use_first_any

基准测试代码:

from timeit import timeit
from random import shuffle
from bisect import insort
from itertools import groupby

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

def use_first_any(iterable):
    g = groupby(iterable)
    return not any(g) or not any(g)

def next_as_statement(iterable):
    g = groupby(iterable)
    next(g, None)
    return not next(g, False)

def use_first_next(iterable):
    g = groupby(iterable)
    return not next(g, False) or not next(g, False)

funcs = [original, use_first_any, next_as_statement, use_first_next]

for iterable in (), (1,), (1, 2):
    print(f'{iterable = }')
    times = {func: [] for func in funcs}
    for _ in range(1000):
        shuffle(funcs)
        for func in funcs:
            number = 1000
            t = timeit(lambda: func(iterable), number=number) / number
            insort(times[func], t)
    for func in sorted(funcs, key=times.get):
        print(*('%4d ns ' % round(t * 1e9) for t in times[func][:3]), func.__name__)
    print()

如果你对一些更有可读性的东西感兴趣(但当然不是那么高效)，你可以尝试:

def compare_lists(list1, list2):
    if len(list1) != len(list2): # Weed out unequal length lists.
        return False
    for item in list1:
        if item not in list2:
            return False
    return True

a_list_1 = ['apple', 'orange', 'grape', 'pear']
a_list_2 = ['pear', 'orange', 'grape', 'apple']

b_list_1 = ['apple', 'orange', 'grape', 'pear']
b_list_2 = ['apple', 'orange', 'banana', 'pear']

c_list_1 = ['apple', 'orange', 'grape']
c_list_2 = ['grape', 'orange']

print compare_lists(a_list_1, a_list_2) # Returns True
print compare_lists(b_list_1, b_list_2) # Returns False
print compare_lists(c_list_1, c_list_2) # Returns False

最佳答案

Twitter上有一个不错的帖子，介绍了实现all_equal()函数的各种方法。

给定一个列表输入，最好的提交是:

 t.count(t[0]) == len(t)  

其他方法

下面是线程的结果:

Have groupby() compare adjacent entries. This has an early-out for a mismatch, does not use extra memory, and it runs at C speed. g = itertools.groupby(s) next(g, True) and not next(g, False) Compare two slices offset from one another by one position. This uses extra memory but runs at C speed. s[1:] == s[:-1] Iterator version of slice comparison. It runs at C speed and does not use extra memory; however, the eq calls are expensive. all(map(operator.eq, s, itertools.islice(s, 1, None))) Compare the lowest and highest values. This runs at C speed, doesn't use extra memory, but does cost two inequality tests per datum. min(s) == max(s) # s must be non-empty Build a set. This runs at C speed and uses little extra memory but requires hashability and does not have an early-out. len(set(t))==1. At great cost, this handles NaNs and other objects with exotic equality relations. all(itertools.starmap(eq, itertools.product(s, repeat=2))) Pull out the first element and compare all the others to it, stopping at the first mismatch. Only disadvantage is that this doesn't run at C speed. it = iter(s) a = next(it, None) return all(a == b for b in it) Just count the first element. This is fast, simple, elegant. It runs at C speed, requires no additional memory, uses only equality tests, and makes only a single pass over the data. t.count(t[0]) == len(t)

检查是否所有元素都等于第一个。

np。allclose(数组,数组[0])

这是一段具有良好的Python性的代码，并且平衡了简单性和明显性，我认为，这应该也适用于相当老的Python版本。

def all_eq(lst):
    for idx, itm in enumerate(lst):
        if not idx:   # == 0
            prev = itm
        if itm != prev:
            return False
        prev = itm
    return True

这是一种简单的方法:

result = mylist and all(mylist[0] == elem for elem in mylist)

这稍微复杂一点，它会引起函数调用开销，但语义更清楚地说明:

def all_identical(seq):
    if not seq:
        # empty list is False.
        return False
    first = seq[0]
    return all(first == elem for elem in seq)