abhi9u@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoPython Performance: Why 'if not list' is 2x Faster Than Using len()blog.codingconfessions.comexternal-linkmessage-square82linkfedilinkarrow-up1124arrow-down112cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1112arrow-down1external-linkPython Performance: Why 'if not list' is 2x Faster Than Using len()blog.codingconfessions.comabhi9u@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square82linkfedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareantlion@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·1 year agoCould also compare against: if not len(mylist) That way this version isn’t evaluating two functions. The bool evaluation of an integer is false when zero, otherwise true.
minus-squareFooBarrington@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·1 year agoThis is honestly the worst version regarding readability. Don’t rely on implicit coercion, people.
minus-squareantlion@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 year agoBut the first example does the same thing for an empty list. I guess the lesson is that if you’re measuring the speed of arbitrary stylistic syntax choices, maybe Python isn’t the best language for you.
Could also compare against:
That way this version isn’t evaluating two functions. The bool evaluation of an integer is false when zero, otherwise true.
This is honestly the worst version regarding readability. Don’t rely on implicit coercion, people.
But the first example does the same thing for an empty list. I guess the lesson is that if you’re measuring the speed of arbitrary stylistic syntax choices, maybe Python isn’t the best language for you.