abhi9u@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 years agoPython Performance: Why 'if not list' is 2x Faster Than Using len()blog.codingconfessions.comexternal-linkmessage-square145linkfedilinkarrow-up1219arrow-down125cross-posted to: python@programming.dev
arrow-up1194arrow-down1external-linkPython Performance: Why 'if not list' is 2x Faster Than Using len()blog.codingconfessions.comabhi9u@lemmy.world to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 2 years agomessage-square145linkfedilinkcross-posted to: python@programming.dev
minus-squareriodoro1@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 years agoThat’s exactly what I was getting at. Getting length of an empty list would not even enter the loop.
minus-squareChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 years agoYes. If it’s empty. But in cases where you need to check, it might as well not be.
That’s exactly what I was getting at. Getting length of an empty list would not even enter the loop.
Yes. If it’s empty. But in cases where you need to check, it might as well not be.