Welcome, guest | Sign In | My Account | Store | Cart

This is an implementation of the binary search algorithm in (almost) one line. Given a number 'n' and a list 'L', the function returns the index of the number on the list, or -1.

Python, 7 lines
def search(n, L):
    f = lambda n,L,o: len(L) and ( \
        (n == L[len(L)/2])*(len(L)/2+o) or \
        (n < L[len(L)/2] and f(n,L[:len(L)/2],o)) or \
        (n > L[len(L)/2] and f(n,L[len(L)/2+1:],o+len(L)/2+1)))

    return f(n,L,1) - 1

I did this function for a series of programming katas (http://pragprog.com/pragdave/Practices/Kata/KataTwo.rdoc). The goal of the second kata is to come up with five unique approaches to a binary chop, one per day. I was curious if I could do it in one line, and here's the result.

I encountered some problems while developing it because 0 is a valid index, but it’s also a boolean false. That’s why I add an offset of 1 when calling the function, and subtract 1 later.

The function is only a little slower than other recursive or iterative implementations that I've tried.


Mabooka-Mabooka Mbe-Mbe 18 years, 10 months ago  # | flag

oneliners vs. reali-word apps. >> The function is only a little slower than other recursive or iterative implementations that I've tried.

Really? I'd like to see the benchmarking code.

Below are results of mine. It compares four algorithms:

A1: the one-liner posted here;
A2: the built-in "index" (stupidly traversing the array every time, even in C:-));
A3: the built-in binary search (bisect);
A4: the built-for-lookups hash.

The output might look like this (doing it 100 times for an array of 10,000 elements):

% ./bsearch4.py 100 10000
  A1:lambda:    259.8651
  A2:index:     491.4040
  A3:bisect:    21.7780
  A4:dict:      1.8144
  A1:lambda:    310.5880
  A2:index:     460.4716
  A3:bisect:    20.3987
  A4:dict:      1.7134

What it prints is number of seconds spent on doing the same thing four different ways on two types of data: array-of-ints and array-of-strings. Notes:

1) for real-world apps, if an array is huge (1,000,000?), bisect will beat the hash;

2) don't try it at home.

// How do I attach a file.py here?..

What I love about Python is: it doesn't insist, doesn't even encourage me to write:

total = reduce(lambda x,y: x+y, map(int, line.rstrip().split()))

It's OK in Python to write three lines instead of one:

>>> total=0
>>> for x in line.split():
...     total += int(x)


Mabooka-Mabooka Mbe-Mbe 18 years, 10 months ago  # | flag

oops... Forgot to mention why I tried brute-force-dumb-C. It actually will beat lambda on considerably large arrays:

% ./bsearch4.py 1 100000
  A1:lambda:    1910.2782
  A2:index:     1073.1970
  A3:bisect:    2.6692
  A4:dict:      0.4715
  A1:lambda:    1699.1667
  A2:index:     958.5173
  A3:bisect:    2.3792
  A4:dict:      0.4485

If you're patient enough to try, that is.

Created by Roberto De Almeida on Mon, 9 Feb 2004 (PSF)
Python recipes (4591)
Roberto De Almeida's recipes (1)

Required Modules

  • (none specified)

Other Information and Tasks