abhi9u@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agoPython Performance: Why 'if not list' is 2x Faster Than Using len()blog.codingconfessions.comexternal-linkmessage-square59fedilinkarrow-up1115arrow-down110cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1105arrow-down1external-linkPython Performance: Why 'if not list' is 2x Faster Than Using len()blog.codingconfessions.comabhi9u@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 months agomessage-square59fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareantlion@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up7·2 months 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-up2·2 months agoThis is honestly the worst version regarding readability. Don’t rely on implicit coercion, people.
minus-squareantlion@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 months 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.