tuple versus list

[Xah Lee]

suppose i'm going to have a data structure like this:

[
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
....
]

should i use (width,height) or [width,height]?
what advantage i get to use n-tuple instead of the generic list?

Thanks.

Xah
xa*@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/

[SPE - Stani's Python Editor]

It's simple: if you want to modify the data structure after it has been
created, use lists, otherwise tuples.

Tuples are much more memory efficient, so your program will consume
less memory and probably run faster. So preferably use tuples. However
with tuples you can't do:
t[0] = 'new value'
t.append('new value')
These statements are possible with lists.

Stani
--
SPE - Stani's Python Editor (http://pythonide.stani.be)

[bonono]

In this particular case, it seems that (width,height) looks nicer. But
I think otherwise, list constuct is easier to read, even though it is
supposed to be slower.

With list you can :
[a] + [ x for x in something ]

With tuple it looks like this :
(a,) + tuple(x for x in something)

I think the list looks cleaner. And since you cannot concat tuple with
list, I think unless it looks obvious and natural(as in your case), use
list.

Xah Lee wrote:

suppose i'm going to have a data structure like this:

[
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
[imgFullPath,(wi dth, height)],
...
]

should i use (width,height) or [width,height]?
what advantage i get to use n-tuple instead of the generic list?

Thanks.

Xah
xa*@xahlee.org
∑ http://xahlee.org/

[Bryan]

bo****@gmail.co m wrote:

In this particular case, it seems that (width,height) looks nicer. But
I think otherwise, list constuct is easier to read, even though it is
supposed to be slower.

With list you can :
[a] + [ x for x in something ]

With tuple it looks like this :
(a,) + tuple(x for x in something)

I think the list looks cleaner. And since you cannot concat tuple with
list, I think unless it looks obvious and natural(as in your case), use
list.

i always use the structure analogy. if you view (width, height) as a structure,
use a tuple. if you view it a sequence, use a list. in this example, i view it
as a stucture, so i would use (width, height) as a tuple.

bryan

[Donn Cave]

In article <ma************ *************** **********@pyth on.org>,
Bryan <be****@gmail.c om> wrote:

bo****@gmail.co m wrote:

In this particular case, it seems that (width,height) looks nicer. But
I think otherwise, list constuct is easier to read, even though it is
supposed to be slower.

With list you can :
[a] + [ x for x in something ]

With tuple it looks like this :
(a,) + tuple(x for x in something)

I think the list looks cleaner. And since you cannot concat tuple with
list, I think unless it looks obvious and natural(as in your case), use
list.

i always use the structure analogy. if you view (width, height) as a
structure,
use a tuple. if you view it a sequence, use a list. in this example, i view
it
as a stucture, so i would use (width, height) as a tuple.

Right, but there's an unfortunate ambiguity in the term "sequence",
since in Python it is defined to include tuple. I gather you meant
more in the abstract sense of a data collection whose interesting
properties are of a sequential nature, as opposed to the way we are
typically more interested in positional access to a tuple. Maybe
a more computer literate reader will have a better word for this,
that doesn't collide with Python terminology. My semi-formal
operational definition is "a is similar to a[x:y], where
x is not 0 or y is not -1, and `similar' means `could be a legal
value in the same context.'"

Donn Cave, do**@u.washingt on.edu

[Bryan]

i always use the structure analogy. if you view (width, height) as a
structure,
use a tuple. if you view it a sequence, use a list. in this example, i view
it
as a stucture, so i would use (width, height) as a tuple.

Right, but there's an unfortunate ambiguity in the term "sequence",
since in Python it is defined to include tuple. I gather you meant
more in the abstract sense of a data collection whose interesting
properties are of a sequential nature, as opposed to the way we are
typically more interested in positional access to a tuple. Maybe
a more computer literate reader will have a better word for this,
that doesn't collide with Python terminology. My semi-formal
operational definition is "a is similar to a[x:y], where
x is not 0 or y is not -1, and `similar' means `could be a legal
value in the same context.'"

Donn Cave, do**@u.washingt on.edu

yes, you are correct. i shouldn't have used the word "sequence" which is a
python term. maybe structure vs. array. in any case, i think the *wrong*
answer that is often given to this question is along the lines of if it's read
only, make it a tuple. if it's read write, make it a list. a great trivial
example is a point. a point is a structure (x, y). if you have many points
then you have a list of structures: [(x, y), (x1, y1), (x2, y2), ...]. to me,
it doesn't matter if you want to modify a point. if you do then create a new
one, but don't make it a list just to make it modifiable.

bryan