Timing Difference: insert vs. append & reverse
duncan.booth at invalid.invalid
Wed Aug 4 09:31:33 CEST 2004
bryanjugglercryptographer at yahoo.com (Bryan Olson) wrote in
news:1a517b5.0408031027.60554dfb at posting.google.com:
>> If you expected insert to be faster, perhaps you thought that Python
>> used a linked-list implementation. It doesn't do this, because in
>> practice (for most applications) a [array] based implementation gives
>> better performance.
> True, but an array implementation can easily support amortized
> constant-time insert/delete at *either* end (without breaking
> constant-time indexing). The same trick of keeping extra space
> at the tail end can work at the head; it requires keeping one
> additional offset to show where the occupied cells start.
If the OP had said he expected insert and append to be the same speed I
might buy that, but he expected insert to be faster than append.
More information about the Python-list