在Python中对正则表达式使用compile有什么好处吗?
h = re.compile('hello')
h.match('hello world')
vs
re.match('hello', 'hello world')
在Python中对正则表达式使用compile有什么好处吗?
h = re.compile('hello')
h.match('hello world')
vs
re.match('hello', 'hello world')
当前回答
下面是一个使用re.compile的示例,在请求时速度超过50倍。
这一点与我在上面的评论中所说的是一样的,即当您的使用从编译缓存中获益不多时,使用re.compile可能是一个显著的优势。这种情况至少发生在一个特定的情况下(我在实践中遇到过),即当以下所有情况都成立时:
您有很多regex模式(不仅仅是re._MAXCACHE,它目前的默认值是512),以及 你经常使用这些正则表达式,而且 相同模式的连续使用之间被多个re._MAXCACHE其他正则表达式分隔,因此每个正则表达式在连续使用之间从缓存中刷新。
import re
import time
def setup(N=1000):
# Patterns 'a.*a', 'a.*b', ..., 'z.*z'
patterns = [chr(i) + '.*' + chr(j)
for i in range(ord('a'), ord('z') + 1)
for j in range(ord('a'), ord('z') + 1)]
# If this assertion below fails, just add more (distinct) patterns.
# assert(re._MAXCACHE < len(patterns))
# N strings. Increase N for larger effect.
strings = ['abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz'] * N
return (patterns, strings)
def without_compile():
print('Without re.compile:')
patterns, strings = setup()
print('searching')
count = 0
for s in strings:
for pat in patterns:
count += bool(re.search(pat, s))
return count
def without_compile_cache_friendly():
print('Without re.compile, cache-friendly order:')
patterns, strings = setup()
print('searching')
count = 0
for pat in patterns:
for s in strings:
count += bool(re.search(pat, s))
return count
def with_compile():
print('With re.compile:')
patterns, strings = setup()
print('compiling')
compiled = [re.compile(pattern) for pattern in patterns]
print('searching')
count = 0
for s in strings:
for regex in compiled:
count += bool(regex.search(s))
return count
start = time.time()
print(with_compile())
d1 = time.time() - start
print(f'-- That took {d1:.2f} seconds.\n')
start = time.time()
print(without_compile_cache_friendly())
d2 = time.time() - start
print(f'-- That took {d2:.2f} seconds.\n')
start = time.time()
print(without_compile())
d3 = time.time() - start
print(f'-- That took {d3:.2f} seconds.\n')
print(f'Ratio: {d3/d1:.2f}')
我在笔记本电脑上获得的示例输出(Python 3.7.7):
With re.compile:
compiling
searching
676000
-- That took 0.33 seconds.
Without re.compile, cache-friendly order:
searching
676000
-- That took 0.67 seconds.
Without re.compile:
searching
676000
-- That took 23.54 seconds.
Ratio: 70.89
I didn't bother with timeit as the difference is so stark, but I get qualitatively similar numbers each time. Note that even without re.compile, using the same regex multiple times and moving on to the next one wasn't so bad (only about 2 times as slow as with re.compile), but in the other order (looping through many regexes), it is significantly worse, as expected. Also, increasing the cache size works too: simply setting re._MAXCACHE = len(patterns) in setup() above (of course I don't recommend doing such things in production as names with underscores are conventionally “private”) drops the ~23 seconds back down to ~0.7 seconds, which also matches our understanding.
其他回答
我自己刚试过。对于从字符串中解析数字并对其求和的简单情况,使用编译后的正则表达式对象的速度大约是使用re方法的两倍。
正如其他人指出的那样,re方法(包括re.compile)在以前编译的表达式缓存中查找正则表达式字符串。因此,在正常情况下,使用re方法的额外成本只是缓存查找的成本。
然而,检查代码,缓存被限制为100个表达式。这就引出了一个问题,缓存溢出有多痛苦?该代码包含正则表达式编译器的内部接口re.sre_compile.compile。如果我们调用它,就绕过了缓存。结果表明,对于一个基本的正则表达式,例如r'\w+\s+([0-9_]+)\s+\w*',它要慢两个数量级。
下面是我的测试:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import re
import time
def timed(func):
def wrapper(*args):
t = time.time()
result = func(*args)
t = time.time() - t
print '%s took %.3f seconds.' % (func.func_name, t)
return result
return wrapper
regularExpression = r'\w+\s+([0-9_]+)\s+\w*'
testString = "average 2 never"
@timed
def noncompiled():
a = 0
for x in xrange(1000000):
m = re.match(regularExpression, testString)
a += int(m.group(1))
return a
@timed
def compiled():
a = 0
rgx = re.compile(regularExpression)
for x in xrange(1000000):
m = rgx.match(testString)
a += int(m.group(1))
return a
@timed
def reallyCompiled():
a = 0
rgx = re.sre_compile.compile(regularExpression)
for x in xrange(1000000):
m = rgx.match(testString)
a += int(m.group(1))
return a
@timed
def compiledInLoop():
a = 0
for x in xrange(1000000):
rgx = re.compile(regularExpression)
m = rgx.match(testString)
a += int(m.group(1))
return a
@timed
def reallyCompiledInLoop():
a = 0
for x in xrange(10000):
rgx = re.sre_compile.compile(regularExpression)
m = rgx.match(testString)
a += int(m.group(1))
return a
r1 = noncompiled()
r2 = compiled()
r3 = reallyCompiled()
r4 = compiledInLoop()
r5 = reallyCompiledInLoop()
print "r1 = ", r1
print "r2 = ", r2
print "r3 = ", r3
print "r4 = ", r4
print "r5 = ", r5
</pre>
And here is the output on my machine:
<pre>
$ regexTest.py
noncompiled took 4.555 seconds.
compiled took 2.323 seconds.
reallyCompiled took 2.325 seconds.
compiledInLoop took 4.620 seconds.
reallyCompiledInLoop took 4.074 seconds.
r1 = 2000000
r2 = 2000000
r3 = 2000000
r4 = 2000000
r5 = 20000
'reallyCompiled'方法使用内部接口,绕过缓存。注意,在每个循环迭代中编译的代码只迭代了10,000次,而不是一百万次。
使用第二个版本时,正则表达式在使用之前会进行编译。如果你要多次执行它,最好先编译它。如果不是每次编译都匹配一次性的是好的。
这个答案可能姗姗来迟,但却是一个有趣的发现。如果你打算多次使用regex,使用compile真的可以节省你的时间(这在文档中也有提到)。下面你可以看到,当直接调用match方法时,使用编译后的正则表达式是最快的。将一个编译好的正则表达式传递给re.match会使它更慢,而将re.match与patter字符串传递在中间的某个地方。
>>> ipr = r'\D+((([0-2][0-5]?[0-5]?)\.){3}([0-2][0-5]?[0-5]?))\D+'
>>> average(*timeit.repeat("re.match(ipr, 'abcd100.10.255.255 ')", globals={'ipr': ipr, 're': re}))
1.5077415757028423
>>> ipr = re.compile(ipr)
>>> average(*timeit.repeat("re.match(ipr, 'abcd100.10.255.255 ')", globals={'ipr': ipr, 're': re}))
1.8324008992184038
>>> average(*timeit.repeat("ipr.match('abcd100.10.255.255 ')", globals={'ipr': ipr, 're': re}))
0.9187896518778871
易读性/认知负荷偏好
对我来说,主要的收获是我只需要记住和阅读复杂的正则表达式API语法的一种形式——<compiled_pattern>.method(xxx)形式而不是那个和re.func(<pattern>, xxx)形式。
re.compile(<pattern>)是一个额外的样板文件,true。
但是考虑到正则表达式,额外的编译步骤不太可能是认知负荷的主要原因。事实上,对于复杂的模式,您甚至可以通过将声明与随后对其调用的任何regex方法分开来获得清晰性。
我倾向于首先在Regex101这样的网站中调优复杂的模式,甚至在单独的最小测试脚本中调优,然后将它们带入我的代码中,因此将声明与其使用分离也适合我的工作流程。
我同意诚实的亚伯,所给例子中的匹配(…)是不同的。他们不是一对一的比较,因此,结果是不同的。为了简化我的回答,我用A, B, C, D来表示这些函数。哦,是的,我们在re.py中处理的是4个函数而不是3个。
运行这段代码:
h = re.compile('hello') # (A)
h.match('hello world') # (B)
与运行此代码相同:
re.match('hello', 'hello world') # (C)
因为,当查看源代码re.py时,(A + B)意味着:
h = re._compile('hello') # (D)
h.match('hello world')
(C)实际上是:
re._compile('hello').match('hello world')
因此,(C)与(B)并不相同,实际上(C)在调用(D)之后调用(B), (D)也被(A)调用,换句话说,(C) = (A) + (B),因此,在循环中比较(A + B)与在循环中比较(C)的结果相同。
George的regexTest.py为我们证明了这一点。
noncompiled took 4.555 seconds. # (C) in a loop
compiledInLoop took 4.620 seconds. # (A + B) in a loop
compiled took 2.323 seconds. # (A) once + (B) in a loop
大家的兴趣是,如何得到2.323秒的结果。为了确保compile(…)只被调用一次,我们需要将编译后的regex对象存储在内存中。如果使用类,则可以存储对象,并在每次调用函数时重用该对象。
class Foo:
regex = re.compile('hello')
def my_function(text)
return regex.match(text)
如果我们不使用类(这是我今天的要求),那么我没有评论。我还在学习如何在Python中使用全局变量,我知道全局变量不是什么好东西。
还有一点,我认为使用(A) + (B)的方法有优势。以下是我观察到的一些事实(如果我错了,请指正):
Calls A once, it will do one search in the _cache followed by one sre_compile.compile() to create a regex object. Calls A twice, it will do two searches and one compile (because the regex object is cached). If the _cache gets flushed in between, then the regex object is released from memory and Python needs to compile again. (someone suggests that Python won't recompile.) If we keep the regex object by using (A), the regex object will still get into _cache and get flushed somehow. But our code keeps a reference on it and the regex object will not be released from memory. Those, Python need not to compile again. The 2 seconds difference in George's test compiled loop vs compiled is mainly the time required to build the key and search the _cache. It doesn't mean the compile time of regex. George's reallycompile test show what happens if it really re-do the compile every time: it will be 100x slower (he reduced the loop from 1,000,000 to 10,000).
以下是(A + B)比(C)更好的情况:
如果可以在类中缓存regex对象的引用。 如果需要重复调用(B)(在循环内或多次),则必须在循环外缓存对regex对象的引用。
如果(C)足够好:
不能缓存引用。 我们只是偶尔用一次。 总的来说,我们没有太多的正则表达式(假设编译后的正则表达式永远不会被刷新)
简单回顾一下,以下是abc:
h = re.compile('hello') # (A)
h.match('hello world') # (B)
re.match('hello', 'hello world') # (C)
感谢阅读。