[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: remove-duplicates performances
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: remove-duplicates performances |
Date: |
Fri, 20 May 2011 16:28:45 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Thierry Volpiatto <address@hidden> writes:
> i just noticed that `remove-duplicates' is very slow.
>
> Something like below seem much faster:
>
> (defun* remove-dups (seq &key (test 'eq))
> (let ((cont (make-hash-table :test test)))
> (loop for elm in seq
> unless (gethash elm cont)
> do (puthash elm elm cont)
> finally return (loop for i being the hash-values in cont collect i))))
>
> Test:
>
> (setq A (let ((seq (loop for i from 1 to 10000 collect i)))
> (append seq seq)))
> (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 ...)
>
> (remove-dups A)
> (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ...)
> elp-results: remove-dups 1 0.013707 0.013707
>
> (remove-duplicates A)
> (1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 ...)
> elp-results: remove-duplicates 1 66.971619 66.971619
>
> Would be nice to improve performances of `remove-duplicates'.
There is little point in the overhead of a hashtable for a one-shot
operation. Hashtables are best for _maintaining_ data, not for
processing other data structures.
I've found the following in some file of mine:
(defun uniquify (list predicate)
(let* ((p list) lst (x1 (make-symbol "x1"))
(x2 (make-symbol "x2")))
(while p
(push p lst)
(setq p (cdr p)))
;;; (princ lst)(princ "\n")
(setq lst
(sort lst `(lambda(,x1 ,x2)
(funcall ',predicate (car ,x1) (car ,x2)))))
;;; lst now contains all sorted sublists, with equal cars being
;;; sorted in order of increasing length (from end of list to start).
;;
(while (cdr lst)
(unless (funcall predicate (car (car lst)) (car (cadr lst)))
(setcar (car lst) x1))
(setq lst (cdr lst)))
(delq x1 list)))
(uniquify '(2 1 2 1 2) '<)
(uniquify '(4 7 3 26 4 2 6 24 4 5 2 3 2 4 6) '<)
Obviously, this should make use of lexical binding "nowadays" instead of
creating its own unique symbols for function parameters. And instead of
using x1 as a sentinel value some other unique thing might be used, like
a one-shot '(nil).
Basically, for a one-shot O(n^2) operation on a list, `sort' will
usually do the trick. But if you are doing that O(n^2) operation
regularly, you should probably maintain the whole data set in a
hashtable instead.
--
David Kastrup
- remove-duplicates performances, Thierry Volpiatto, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, Thierry Volpiatto, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, David Kastrup, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, Thierry Volpiatto, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, David Kastrup, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, Stefan Monnier, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, Pascal J. Bourguignon, 2011/05/20
- Re: remove-duplicates performances, Ted Zlatanov, 2011/05/20