Stefan Behnel <stefan...@behnel.de> added the comment: The constant function call overhead doesn't make a big difference:
$ /opt/python3.7-opt/bin/python3 -m timeit 'list(i for i in range(1000))' 5000 loops, best of 5: 55 usec per loop $ /opt/python3.7-opt/bin/python3 -m timeit '[i for i in range(1000)]' 10000 loops, best of 5: 30.7 usec per loop The difference is that comprehensions are generally more efficient than generators, simply because they are more specialised. When a generator is created, it does not know whether it will be passed into list() to quickly unpack it into a list, or into some complex machinery that just requests one value per year, or only one value at all and then throws it away. I searched a bit, but couldn't find a ticket about the performance difference above, although I'm sure there must be one. So I'll leave this open for now, assuming that there might still be something to improve here. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <https://bugs.python.org/issue32945> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
