That's actually how I coded it myself the first time. But I worried it
would be wasteful to create an intermediate dict and discard it.
`timeit` results:
3.79 µs for the for-loop, 5.08 µs for the dict-comprehension with a 10-key
Counter
257 µs for the for-loop, 169 µs for the dict-comprehension with a 1000-key
Counter
So results are mixed, but you are probably right.
On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 3:46 PM Wes Turner <wes.tur...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good call. Is it any faster to initialize Counter with a dict
> comprehension?
>
> return Counter({k: v*scalar for (k, v) in self.items())
>
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 5:05 PM, Peter Norvig <pe...@norvig.com> wrote:
>
>> For most types that implement __add__, `x + x` is equal to `2 * x`.
>>
>> That is true for all numbers, list, tuple, str, timedelta, etc. -- but
>> not for collections.Counter. I can add two Counters, but I can't multiply
>> one by a scalar. That seems like an oversight.
>>
>> It would be worthwhile to implement multiplication because, among other
>> reasons, Counters are a nice representation for discrete probability
>> distributions, for which multiplication is an even more fundamental
>> operation than addition.
>>
>> Here's an implementation:
>>
>> def __mul__(self, scalar):
>> "Multiply each entry by a scalar."
>> result = Counter()
>> for key in self:
>> result[key] = self[key] * scalar
>> return result
>>
>> def __rmul__(self, scalar):
>> "Multiply each entry by a scalar."
>> result = Counter()
>> for key in self:
>> result[key] = scalar * self[key]
>> return result
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Python-ideas mailing list
>> Python-ideas@python.org
>> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
>> Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
