Which is faster? (if not b in m) or (if m.count(b) > 0)

Which is Faster in Python and Why? jc = {}; m = [] x = [ [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9],[..],...] # upwards of 1 entries def mcountb(): for item in x: b = item[:]; b.sort(); bc = 0 for bitem in b: bc += int(bitem) try: m = jc[bc] except: m = [] if m.count

Re: Which is faster? (if not b in m) or (if m.count(b) > 0)

Great observations... Changing for lists to tuples would make sorting unnecessary... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Which is faster? (if not b in m) or (if m.count(b) > 0)

Well, I could, but I was looking for answers from persons more experienced in the ways of Python then myself -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Which is faster? (if not b in m) or (if m.count(b) > 0)

Tim, Are you saying that: not (b in m) is faster than: b not in m -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Which is faster? (if not b in m) or (if m.count(b) > 0)

Execellent, Kent. Thank you... and everyone too! I've learned much! -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Which is faster? (if not b in m) or (if m.count(b) > 0)

Thank you, Peter! Please understand, I was attempting to get more info on the WHY x is faster than y... from those with more experience. Timer cannot give me that info. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list