On Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:01:42 -0700, Michael Spencer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Steven Bethard wrote: >> Bengt Richter wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:37:03 -0600, Steven Bethard >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> I have a list of strings that looks something like: >>>> ['O', 'B_X', 'B_Y', 'I_Y', 'O', 'B_X', 'I_X', 'B_X'] > >[snip] >>> >>> With error checks on predecessor relationship, >>> I think I'd do the whole thing in a generator, > >I'm curious why you (Bengt or Steve) think the generator is an advantage here. >As Steve stated, the data already exists in lists of strings. I hadn't seen your post[1], which I think is a nice crisp and clever solution ;-) I just wrote what I thought was a straightforward solution, anticipating that the imput list might be some huge bioinfo thing, and you might want to iterate through the sublists one at a time and not want to build the whole list of lists as represented by your stack. [1] I don't know why stuff arrives almost instantly sometimes, and sometimes quite delayed and out of order, but it is a bit embarrassing to post a me-too without relevant comment, or being able to decide whether to play open source leapfrog. In this case, I don't see a lily pad on the other side of your code, other than the memory aspect ;-) > >The direct list-building solution I posted is simpler, and quite a bit faster. > >L = ['O', 'B_X', 'B_Y', 'I_Y', 'O', 'B_X', 'I_X', 'B_X'] > >def timethem(lst, funcs = (get_runsSB, get_runsMS, get_runsBR)): > for func in funcs: > print shell.timefunc(func, lst) > > >>> timethem(L) > get_runsSB(...) 7877 iterations, 63.48usec per call > get_runsMS(...) 31081 iterations, 16.09usec per call > get_runsBR(...) 16114 iterations, 31.03usec per call > > >Michael > Regards, Bengt Richter -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
