Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #63669
| From | Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: L[:] |
| Date | 2014-01-10 17:03 -0500 |
| References | <1389375507.21198.YahooMailBasic@web163801.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.5308.1389391443.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
On 1/10/14 12:38 PM, Albert-Jan Roskam wrote: > In Python Cookbook, one of the authors (I forgot who) consistently used the "L[:]" idiom like below. If the second line simply starts with "L =" (so no "[:]") only the name "L" would be rebound, not the underlying object. That was the authorÅ› explanation as far as I can remember. I do not get that. Why is the "L[:]" idiom more memory-efficient here? How could the increased efficiency be demonstrated? > > #Python 2.7.3 (default, Sep 26 2013, 16:38:10) [GCC 4.7.2] on linux2 >>>> L = [x ** 2 for x in range(10)] >>>> L[:] = ["foo_" + str(x) for x in L] > I'm not sure there is a memory efficiency argument to make here. The big difference is that the first line make L refer to a completely new list, while the second line replaces the contents of an existing list. This makes a big difference if there are other names referring to the list: >>> L = [1, 2, 3, 4] >>> L2 = L >>> L[:] = [] >>> print L2 [] >>> L = [1, 2, 3, 4] >>> L2 = L >>> L = [] >>> print L2 [1, 2, 3, 4] Names and values in Python can be confusing. Here's an explanation of the mechanics: http://nedbatchelder.com/text/names.html HTH, --Ned. > > Thanks! > > > Regards, > > Albert-Jan -- Ned Batchelder, http://nedbatchelder.com
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: L[:] Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2014-01-10 17:03 -0500
csiph-web