Python | List和Deque的速度对比

结论：

        操作队尾元素时，速度差可忽略不计；

        操作队头元素时，Deque远快于List

from collections import deque
from time import time

def test(num, struct, fun):
    sta = time()
    for _ in range(num):
        fun(struct)
    end = time()
    print("time cost: ", end - sta)

1 队尾插入元素---速度对比

num = int(1e7)
struct = list()
fun = lambda struct: struct.append(1)
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.7700014114379883

num = int(1e7)
struct = deque()
fun = lambda struct: struct.append(1)
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.6693985462188721

2 队尾弹出元素---速度对比

num = int(1e7)
struct = list(i for i in range(num))
fun = lambda struct: struct.pop()
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.8014125823974609

num = int(1e7)
struct = deque(i for i in range(num))
fun = lambda struct: struct.pop()
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.6997454166412354

3 队头插入元素---速度对比

num = int(1e5)
struct = list()
fun = lambda struct: struct.insert(0, 1)
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  1.4022290706634521

num = int(1e5)
struct = deque()
fun = lambda struct: struct.appendleft(1)
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.012262105941772461

num = int(1e5)
struct = deque()
fun = lambda struct: struct.insert(0, 1)
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.00999760627746582

4 队头弹出元素---速度对比

num = int(1e5)
struct = list(i for i in range(num))
fun = lambda struct: struct.pop(0)
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  9.153056383132935

num = int(1e5)
struct = deque(i for i in range(num))
fun = lambda struct: struct.popleft()
test(num, struct, fun)

time cost:  0.007311344146728516