On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:31 PM, Brad<schi...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 2, 9:40 pm, "Pablo Torres N." <tn.pa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> If it is speed that we are after, it's my understanding that map and >> filter are faster than iterating with the for statement (and also >> faster than list comprehensions). So here is a rewrite: >> >> def split(seq, func=bool): >> t = filter(func, seq) >> f = filter(lambda x: not func(x), seq) >> return list(t), list(f) >> > > In my simple tests, that takes 1.8x as long as the original solution. > Better than the itertools solution, when "func" is short and fast. I > think the solution here would worse if func was more complex. > > Either way, what I am still wondering is if people would find a built- > in implementation useful?
FWIW, Ruby has Enumerable#partition, which does the same thing as split() and has a better name IMHO. http://www.ruby-doc.org/core/classes/Enumerable.html#M003130 Cheers, Chris -- http://blog.rebertia.com -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
