只是从外部module1中添加这样一个功能的另一个(非常高性能的)实现:

>>> from iteration_utilities import unique_everseen
>>> lst = [1,1,1,2,3,2,2,2,1,3,4]

>>> list(unique_everseen(lst))
[1, 2, 3, 4]

计时

我做了一些计时(Python 3.6)，这些表明它比我测试的所有其他替代方案都快，包括OrderedDict.fromkeys, f7和more_itertools.unique_everseen:

%matplotlib notebook

from iteration_utilities import unique_everseen
from collections import OrderedDict
from more_itertools import unique_everseen as mi_unique_everseen

def f7(seq):
    seen = set()
    seen_add = seen.add
    return [x for x in seq if not (x in seen or seen_add(x))]

def iteration_utilities_unique_everseen(seq):
    return list(unique_everseen(seq))

def more_itertools_unique_everseen(seq):
    return list(mi_unique_everseen(seq))

def odict(seq):
    return list(OrderedDict.fromkeys(seq))

from simple_benchmark import benchmark

b = benchmark([f7, iteration_utilities_unique_everseen, more_itertools_unique_everseen, odict],
              {2**i: list(range(2**i)) for i in range(1, 20)},
              'list size (no duplicates)')
b.plot()

为了确保这一点，我还做了一个重复的测试，看看是否有区别:

import random

b = benchmark([f7, iteration_utilities_unique_everseen, more_itertools_unique_everseen, odict],
              {2**i: [random.randint(0, 2**(i-1)) for _ in range(2**i)] for i in range(1, 20)},
              'list size (lots of duplicates)')
b.plot()

一个只包含一个值:

b = benchmark([f7, iteration_utilities_unique_everseen, more_itertools_unique_everseen, odict],
              {2**i: [1]*(2**i) for i in range(1, 20)},
              'list size (only duplicates)')
b.plot()

在所有这些情况下，iteration_utilities。Unique_everseen函数是最快的(在我的电脑上)。

这iteration_utilities。unique_everseen函数也可以处理输入中的不可哈希值(但是当值是可哈希值时，性能是O(n*n)而不是O(n))。

>>> lst = [{1}, {1}, {2}, {1}, {3}]

>>> list(unique_everseen(lst))
[{1}, {2}, {3}]

1免责声明:我是该软件包的作者。

一行列表的理解:

values_non_duplicated = [value for index, value in enumerate(values) if value not in values[ : index]]

5倍更快减少变种，但更复杂

>>> l = [5, 6, 6, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4]
>>> reduce(lambda r, v: v in r[1] and r or (r[0].append(v) or r[1].add(v)) or r, l, ([], set()))[0]
[5, 6, 1, 2, 3, 4]

解释:

default = (list(), set())
# use list to keep order
# use set to make lookup faster

def reducer(result, item):
    if item not in result[1]:
        result[0].append(item)
        result[1].add(item)
    return result

>>> reduce(reducer, l, default)[0]
[5, 6, 1, 2, 3, 4]

对于不可哈希类型(例如列表的列表)，基于MizardX的:

def f7_noHash(seq)
    seen = set()
    return [ x for x in seq if str( x ) not in seen and not seen.add( str( x ) )]

对于另一个非常古老的问题的一个非常晚的回答:

itertools食谱有一个函数可以做到这一点，使用了见集技术，但是:

处理标准键函数。 不使用不体面的黑客。 通过预绑定优化循环。加，而不是查N次。(f7也这样做，但有些版本没有。) 通过使用ifilterfalse优化循环，因此只需遍历Python中唯一的元素，而不是所有元素。(当然，您仍然在ifilterfalse中遍历所有它们，但这是在C中，而且要快得多。)

Is it actually faster than f7? It depends on your data, so you'll have to test it and see. If you want a list in the end, f7 uses a listcomp, and there's no way to do that here. (You can directly append instead of yielding, or you can feed the generator into the list function, but neither one can be as fast as the LIST_APPEND inside a listcomp.) At any rate, usually, squeezing out a few microseconds is not going to be as important as having an easily-understandable, reusable, already-written function that doesn't require DSU when you want to decorate.

和所有的食谱一样，它也有更多的版本。

如果你只想要无键的情况，你可以简化为:

def unique(iterable):
    seen = set()
    seen_add = seen.add
    for element in itertools.ifilterfalse(seen.__contains__, iterable):
        seen_add(element)
        yield element

x = [1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 4]

# brute force method
arr = []
for i in x:
  if not i in arr:
    arr.insert(x[i],i)

# recursive method
tmp = []
def remove_duplicates(j=0):
    if j < len(x):
      if not x[j] in tmp:
        tmp.append(x[j])
      i = j+1  
      remove_duplicates(i)

      

remove_duplicates()