Reinhold Birkenfeld <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Quick solution:
>>
>> for i in lst[:]
>>
>> iterates over a copy.
>
> Addition: In Py2.4, I can't find a problem with
>
> for i in reversed(lst)
>
> Any objections?
>
> Reinhold
I just downloaded py2.4, and made a test using reversed.
it sure be no problem, I thought maybe the reversed holded a copy of list,
and eventually iterated through the copy.
but the truth is not as I thought so:
import sys
class Test:
pass
lst = [Test(),Test(),Test()]
E1: for i in lst[:]:
E2: for i in reversed(lst):
print sys.getrefcount(i)
###################
E1 outputs:
4
4
4
E2 outputs:
3
3
3
It looks that the reversed does not make a copy of list in contrast with lst[:].
so should we regard: reversed is faster than lst[:]?
I do not have any idea about why it is.
- skull
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
