Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #61650
| From | Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Optimizing list processing |
| Date | 2013-12-11 21:26 -0500 |
| References | <52a8fb2d$0$29992$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.3953.1386815228.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 12/11/2013 6:54 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > I have some code which produces a list from an iterable using at least > one temporary list, using a Decorate-Sort-Undecorate idiom. It is a non-standard version thereof, as DSU usually means to decorate with a key that gets discarded. A couple of examples of input and expected output would have been good ;-). > The algorithm looks something like this (simplified): > > table = sorted([(x, i) for i,x in enumerate(iterable)]) This makes two temporaries when only one is needed, and shows why we added generator expressions. table = sorted((x, i) for i,x in enumerate(iterable)) is equivalent to the table; table.sort lines below. The following (untested) should be faster as it avoids tuple unpacking and repacking. from itertools import count table = sorted(t for t in zip(iterable, count)) > table = [i for x,i in table] Did your original un-simplified use zip instead enumerate? Table now has the original index of the items in iterable sorted by the items value. The use for this is not obvious. > The problem here is that for large iterables, say 10 million items or so, > this is *painfully* slow, as my system has to page memory like mad to fit > two large lists into memory at once. So I came up with an in-place > version that saves (approximately) two-thirds of the memory needed. With 1/3 saved by using a genex, it saves 1/2 of the remainder. > table = [(x, i) for i,x in enumerate(iterable)] > table.sorted() (You meant table.sort().) This is an expansion of sorted(genex). It might be slightly faster as list comp may be faster than list(equivalent genex). > for x, i in table: > table[i] = x I cannot understand what you are aiming for here. Besides the fact that this does not work, it keeps x values rather than i indexes as before. > table = [i for x,i in table] done in place is for j, (x,i) in enumerate(table): table[j] = i I expect the list comp be faster than in-place as long as the result list can be allocated and held in memory without paging. (This of course depends on system memory and other memory uses.) List iterators have a __length_hint__ method giving the length of the underlying list, so the list comp result list can potentially be allocated once and then filled in by enumeration and replacement, but in C rather than Python code. -- Terry Jan Reedy
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Optimizing list processing Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-11 23:54 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-12-12 00:59 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-12 01:43 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-12-12 02:09 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing duncan smith <buzzard@invalid.invalid> - 2013-12-12 01:02 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2013-12-12 12:18 +1100
Re: Optimizing list processing Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-12-11 21:26 -0500
Re: Optimizing list processing Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-12 12:08 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-12-12 23:25 +1100
Re: Optimizing list processing MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2013-12-12 13:32 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-12-13 01:06 +1100
Re: Optimizing list processing Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-12-12 13:40 -0500
Re: Optimizing list processing Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-13 00:14 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-12-13 12:01 +1100
Re: Optimizing list processing Stefan Behnel <stefan_ml@behnel.de> - 2013-12-12 12:09 +0100
Re: Optimizing list processing Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2013-12-12 16:08 +0100
Re: Optimizing list processing Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-13 03:01 +0000
Re: Optimizing list processing rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-12-12 21:35 -0800
Re: Optimizing list processing Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2013-12-12 13:07 -0500
csiph-web