我想说的是，预编译在概念上和“字面上”(如在“文学编程”中)都是有利的。看看这段代码片段:

from re import compile as _Re

class TYPO:

  def text_has_foobar( self, text ):
    return self._text_has_foobar_re_search( text ) is not None
  _text_has_foobar_re_search = _Re( r"""(?i)foobar""" ).search

TYPO = TYPO()

在你的应用程序中，你可以这样写:

from TYPO import TYPO
print( TYPO.text_has_foobar( 'FOObar ) )

this is about as simple in terms of functionality as it can get. because this is example is so short, i conflated the way to get _text_has_foobar_re_search all in one line. the disadvantage of this code is that it occupies a little memory for whatever the lifetime of the TYPO library object is; the advantage is that when doing a foobar search, you'll get away with two function calls and two class dictionary lookups. how many regexes are cached by re and the overhead of that cache are irrelevant here.

将其与更常见的风格进行比较，如下所示:

import re

class Typo:

  def text_has_foobar( self, text ):
    return re.compile( r"""(?i)foobar""" ).search( text ) is not None

在应用中:

typo = Typo()
print( typo.text_has_foobar( 'FOObar ) )

我很乐意承认我的风格在python中是非常不寻常的，甚至可能是有争议的。然而，在更接近python的使用方式的示例中，为了进行一次匹配，我们必须实例化一个对象，进行三次实例字典查找，并执行三次函数调用;此外，当使用超过100个正则表达式时，我们可能会遇到重新缓存的麻烦。此外，正则表达式被隐藏在方法体中，这在大多数情况下并不是一个好主意。

可以说，每一个措施的子集——有针对性的，别名的import语句;别名方法(如适用);减少函数调用和对象字典查找——可以帮助减少计算和概念的复杂性。

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。

Ubuntu 22.04:

$ python --version
Python 3.10.6

$ for x in 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000; do python -m timeit -n $x -s 'import re' 're.match("[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{4}", "123-123-1234")'; done
1 loop, best of 5: 972 nsec per loop
:0: UserWarning: The test results are likely unreliable. The worst time (186 usec) was more than four times slower than the best time (972 nsec).
10 loops, best of 5: 819 nsec per loop
:0: UserWarning: The test results are likely unreliable. The worst time (13.9 usec) was more than four times slower than the best time (819 nsec).
100 loops, best of 5: 763 nsec per loop
1000 loops, best of 5: 699 nsec per loop
10000 loops, best of 5: 653 nsec per loop
100000 loops, best of 5: 655 nsec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 5: 656 nsec per loop

$ for x in 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000; do python -m timeit -n $x -s 'import re' 'r = re.compile("[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{4}")' 'r.match("123-123-1234")'; done
1 loop, best of 5: 985 nsec per loop
:0: UserWarning: The test results are likely unreliable. The worst time (134 usec) was more than four times slower than the best time (985 nsec).
10 loops, best of 5: 775 nsec per loop
:0: UserWarning: The test results are likely unreliable. The worst time (13.9 usec) was more than four times slower than the best time (775 nsec).
100 loops, best of 5: 756 nsec per loop
1000 loops, best of 5: 701 nsec per loop
10000 loops, best of 5: 704 nsec per loop
100000 loops, best of 5: 654 nsec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 5: 651 nsec per loop

下面是一个简单的测试用例:

~$ for x in 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000; do python -m timeit -n $x -s 'import re' 're.match("[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{4}", "123-123-1234")'; done
1 loops, best of 3: 3.1 usec per loop
10 loops, best of 3: 2.41 usec per loop
100 loops, best of 3: 2.24 usec per loop
1000 loops, best of 3: 2.21 usec per loop
10000 loops, best of 3: 2.23 usec per loop
100000 loops, best of 3: 2.24 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 2.31 usec per loop

re.compile:

~$ for x in 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000; do python -m timeit -n $x -s 'import re' 'r = re.compile("[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{3}-[0-9]{4}")' 'r.match("123-123-1234")'; done
1 loops, best of 3: 1.91 usec per loop
10 loops, best of 3: 0.691 usec per loop
100 loops, best of 3: 0.701 usec per loop
1000 loops, best of 3: 0.684 usec per loop
10000 loops, best of 3: 0.682 usec per loop
100000 loops, best of 3: 0.694 usec per loop
1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.702 usec per loop

因此，这种简单的情况下编译似乎更快，即使只匹配一次。

我有很多运行一个编译过的正则表达式和实时编译的经验，并没有注意到任何可感知的差异。显然，这只是传闻，当然也不是反对编译的有力论据，但我发现两者之间的差异可以忽略不计。

编辑: 在快速浏览了实际的Python 2.5库代码后，我发现无论何时使用正则表达式(包括调用re.match())， Python都会在内部编译和缓存正则表达式，因此实际上只在正则表达式被编译时进行更改，并且不应该节省太多时间——只节省检查缓存所需的时间(对内部dict类型的键查找)。

来自re.py模块(评论是我的):

def match(pattern, string, flags=0):
    return _compile(pattern, flags).match(string)

def _compile(*key):

    # Does cache check at top of function
    cachekey = (type(key[0]),) + key
    p = _cache.get(cachekey)
    if p is not None: return p

    # ...
    # Does actual compilation on cache miss
    # ...

    # Caches compiled regex
    if len(_cache) >= _MAXCACHE:
        _cache.clear()
    _cache[cachekey] = p
    return p

我仍然经常预编译正则表达式，但只是为了将它们绑定到一个漂亮的、可重用的名称，而不是为了任何预期的性能提升。

在无意中看到这里的讨论之前，我运行了这个测试。然而，在运行它之后，我想我至少会发布我的结果。

我剽窃了Jeff Friedl的“精通正则表达式”中的例子。这是在一台运行OSX 10.6 (2Ghz英特尔酷睿2双核，4GB内存)的macbook上。Python版本为2.6.1。

运行1 -使用re.compile

import re 
import time 
import fpformat
Regex1 = re.compile('^(a|b|c|d|e|f|g)+$') 
Regex2 = re.compile('^[a-g]+$')
TimesToDo = 1000
TestString = "" 
for i in range(1000):
    TestString += "abababdedfg"
StartTime = time.time() 
for i in range(TimesToDo):
    Regex1.search(TestString) 
Seconds = time.time() - StartTime 
print "Alternation takes " + fpformat.fix(Seconds,3) + " seconds"

StartTime = time.time() 
for i in range(TimesToDo):
    Regex2.search(TestString) 
Seconds = time.time() - StartTime 
print "Character Class takes " + fpformat.fix(Seconds,3) + " seconds"

Alternation takes 2.299 seconds
Character Class takes 0.107 seconds

运行2 -不使用re.compile

import re 
import time 
import fpformat

TimesToDo = 1000
TestString = "" 
for i in range(1000):
    TestString += "abababdedfg"
StartTime = time.time() 
for i in range(TimesToDo):
    re.search('^(a|b|c|d|e|f|g)+$',TestString) 
Seconds = time.time() - StartTime 
print "Alternation takes " + fpformat.fix(Seconds,3) + " seconds"

StartTime = time.time() 
for i in range(TimesToDo):
    re.search('^[a-g]+$',TestString) 
Seconds = time.time() - StartTime 
print "Character Class takes " + fpformat.fix(Seconds,3) + " seconds"

Alternation takes 2.508 seconds
Character Class takes 0.109 seconds