The Python String Concatenation Shootout
Python is the language of one, and only one, obvious way to do things. This isn't quite the case when it comes to concatenating string though. There's three obvious choices. First, you can use the + operator. Since strings are considered a sequence type, along with lists and tuples, this works just like you would expect:
>>> str1, str2, str3 = 'abc', 'def', 'ghi' >>> str1 + str2 + str3 'abcdefghi'
String formatting is also an option. This comes with a host of advantages, including type coercion when necessary. In this simple case it looks like this:
>>> "%s%s%s" % (str1, str2, str3) 'abcdefghi'
Finally, there's the join method available on every string. This method takes a list of strings and joins them together with the calling string in between each element. If this method is called from the empty string, the elements of the list are joined with nothing between them. For example:
>>> ''.join([str1, str2, str3]) 'abcdefghi' >>> ', '.join([str1, str2, str3]) 'abc, def, ghi'
If we want to write idiomatic python, we're advised against using the addition method in favor of using join. String formatting is not mentioned. Presumably, the flexibility of the formatting system is overkill for such a simple application. This is easy enough to test though, so let's see how the performance compares on a common application, say building a url with a username and some kind of id number.
def join_test(s, i): return ''.join(['/user/', s, '/', str(i), '/']) def format_test(s, i): return "/user/%s/%i/" % (s, i) def plus_test(s, i): return '/user/' + s + '/' + str(i) + '/'
Now we just need to use Python's timeit module to build some timers. When the timer's timeit method is called, it will run its function 1,000,000 times and report how long it took.
import timeit jointimer = timeit.Timer("string_test.join_test('test', 5)", "import string_test") print "Join method took %f seconds" % jointimer.timeit() formattimer = timeit.Timer("string_test.format_test('test', 5)", "import string_test") print "Format method took %f seconds" % formattimer.timeit() plustimer = timeit.Timer("string_test.plus_test('test', 5)", "import string_test") print "Plus method took %f seconds" % plustimer.timeit()
Simple enough, right? Let's look at the results.
Join method took 1.115780 seconds Format method took 1.275534 seconds Plus method took 0.756690 seconds
Whoa! Now here's where I got confused. It turns out the much-maligned "plus" method of string concatenation is actually the fastest by a pretty wide margin. Has it been improved considerably since the Python idioms were determined or am I just doing something wrong? Occam's razor would suggest that I'm doing something wrong. Let's look more closely at the idiom and figure out what's different.
Start with a list of strings: colors = ['red', 'blue', 'green', 'yellow'] We want to join all the strings together into one large string. Especially when the number of substrings is large... Don't do this:
result = '' for s in colors: result += s
This is very inefficient. It has terrible memory usage and performance patterns. The "summation" will compute, store, and then throw away each intermediate step. Instead, do this:
result = ''.join(colors)
The join() string method does all the copying in one pass.
Well, for one thing, the usage we're being warned about here is a list of strings being summed by a loop. Let's add another test that matches that scenario exactly and see how it performs.
def loop_test(s, i): l = ['/user/', s, '/', str(i), '/'] result = '' for s in l: result += s return result looptimer = timeit.Timer("string_test.loop_test('test', 5)", "import string_test") print "Loop method took %f seconds" % looptimer.timeit()
And the result:
Loop method took 1.427076 seconds
Now, that makes more sense. The overhead of the loop adds to the time considerably. In fact, if we modify the plus_test function to add the overhead of making a list, this alone accounts for a large portion of the difference in performance.
def plus_test(s, i): l = ['/user/', s, '/', str(i), '/'] return '/user/' + s + '/' + str(i) + '/' Plus method took 1.259691 seconds
So, if you can avoid building a list and just sum the strings together directly, this is the fastest way to concatenate them. However, if they're already in a list, using join is your best bet. The format method is pretty slow even without the overhead of making a list, but it's probably going to be a bit more readable when there's multiple substitutions with different types involved.
Of course, you should always profile your code to see where the bottlenecks are before making any changes. If you're starting from scratch though, it doesn't hurt to use the fastest method available.Originally published 2010-03-01 10:42:41 on That's Debatable