In Python, len
is a function to get the length of a collection by calling an object's __len__
method:
def len(x):
return x.__len__()
So I would expect direct call of __len__()
to be at least as fast as len()
.
import timeit
setup = '''
'''
print (timeit.Timer('a="12345"; x=a.__len__()', setup=setup).repeat(10))
print (timeit.Timer('a="12345"; x=len(a)', setup=setup).repeat(10))
But results of testing with the above code shows len()
to be faster. Why?
The builtin
len()
function does not look up the.__len__
attribute. It looks up thetp_as_sequence
pointer, which in turn has asq_length
attribute.The
.__len__
attribute on built-in objects is indirectly mapped to the same slot, and it is that indirection (plus the attribute lookup) that takes more time.For Python-defined classes, the
type
object looks up the.__len__
method when thesq_length
is requested.__len__
is slower thanlen()
, because__len__
involves a dict lookup.