Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch wrote: > Why do you make it that complicated? If you are going to build a new list > anyway, this can be done without the `set()` and just one listcomp:
Fredrik Lundh wrote: > your set approach doesn't modify the list in place, though; it creates > a new list, in a rather roundabout way. if modification in place isn't > important, the normal way is of course to create a *new* list: > > items = [i for i in items if not i < 0.5] > > on my machine, that's about two orders of magnitude faster than your > "fast" approach for n=100000. Sorry, I should have clarified that the original post assumed you needed info from the "do something" phase to determine if an element is removed or not. As you say, a list comprehension is superior if that is not necessary. -- Adam Olsen, aka Rhamphoryncus -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list