mirror of https://github.com/python/cpython
Add docs for heapq.py.
This commit is contained in:
parent
de994d9130
commit
975121664e
|
@ -120,6 +120,7 @@ and how to embed it in other applications.
|
|||
\input{librandom}
|
||||
\input{libwhrandom}
|
||||
\input{libbisect}
|
||||
\input{libheapq}
|
||||
\input{libarray}
|
||||
\input{libcfgparser}
|
||||
\input{libfileinput}
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,164 @@
|
|||
\section{\module{heapq} ---
|
||||
Heap queue algorithm}
|
||||
|
||||
\declaremodule{standard}{heapq}
|
||||
\modulesynopsis{Heap queue algorithm (a.k.a. priority queue).}
|
||||
\sectionauthor{Guido van Rossum}{guido@python.org}
|
||||
% Implementation contributed by Kevin O'Connor
|
||||
% Theoretical explanation by François Pinard
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
This module provides an implementation of the heap queue algorithm,
|
||||
also known as the priority queue algorithm.
|
||||
\versionadded{2.3}
|
||||
|
||||
Heaps are arrays for which
|
||||
\code{\var{heap}[\var{k}] <= \var{heap}[2*\var{k}+1]} and
|
||||
\code{\var{heap}[\var{k}] <= \var{heap}[2*\var{k}+2]}
|
||||
for all \var{k}, counting elements from zero. For the sake of
|
||||
comparison, non-existing elements are considered to be infinite. The
|
||||
interesting property of a heap is that \code{\var{heap}[0]} is always
|
||||
its smallest element.
|
||||
|
||||
The API below differs from textbook heap algorithms in two aspects:
|
||||
(a) We use zero-based indexing. This makes the relationship between the
|
||||
index for a node and the indexes for its children slightly less
|
||||
obvious, but is more suitable since Python uses zero-based indexing.
|
||||
(b) Our pop method returns the smallest item, not the largest.
|
||||
|
||||
These two make it possible to view the heap as a regular Python list
|
||||
without surprises: \code{\var{heap}[0]} is the smallest item, and
|
||||
\code{\var{heap}.sort()} maintains the heap invariant!
|
||||
|
||||
To create a heap, use a list initialized to \code{[]}.
|
||||
|
||||
The following functions are provided:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{funcdesc}{heappush}{heap, item}
|
||||
Push the value \var{item} onto the \var{heap}, maintaining the
|
||||
heap invariant.
|
||||
\end{funcdesc}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{funcdesc}{heappop}{heap}
|
||||
Pop and return the smallest item from the \var{heap}, maintaining the
|
||||
heap invariant.
|
||||
\end{funcdesc}
|
||||
|
||||
Example of use:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{verbatim}
|
||||
>>> from heapq import heappush, heappop
|
||||
>>> heap = []
|
||||
>>> data = [1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 2, 4, 6, 8, 0]
|
||||
>>> for item in data:
|
||||
... heappush(heap, item)
|
||||
...
|
||||
>>> sorted = []
|
||||
>>> while heap:
|
||||
... sorted.append(heappop(heap))
|
||||
...
|
||||
>>> print sorted
|
||||
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
|
||||
>>> data.sort()
|
||||
>>> print data == sorted
|
||||
True
|
||||
>>>
|
||||
\end{verbatim}
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Theory}
|
||||
|
||||
(This explanation is due to François Pinard. The Python
|
||||
code for this module was contributed by Kevin O'Connor.)
|
||||
|
||||
Heaps are arrays for which \code{a[\var{k}] <= a[2*\var{k}+1]} and
|
||||
\code{a[\var{k}] <= a[2*\var{k}+2]}
|
||||
for all \var{k}, counting elements from 0. For the sake of comparison,
|
||||
non-existing elements are considered to be infinite. The interesting
|
||||
property of a heap is that \code{a[0]} is always its smallest element.
|
||||
|
||||
The strange invariant above is meant to be an efficient memory
|
||||
representation for a tournament. The numbers below are \var{k}, not
|
||||
\code{a[\var{k}]}:
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{verbatim}
|
||||
0
|
||||
|
||||
1 2
|
||||
|
||||
3 4 5 6
|
||||
|
||||
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
|
||||
|
||||
15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
|
||||
\end{verbatim}
|
||||
|
||||
In the tree above, each cell \var{k} is topping \code{2*\var{k}+1} and
|
||||
\code{2*\var{k}+2}.
|
||||
In an usual binary tournament we see in sports, each cell is the winner
|
||||
over the two cells it tops, and we can trace the winner down the tree
|
||||
to see all opponents s/he had. However, in many computer applications
|
||||
of such tournaments, we do not need to trace the history of a winner.
|
||||
To be more memory efficient, when a winner is promoted, we try to
|
||||
replace it by something else at a lower level, and the rule becomes
|
||||
that a cell and the two cells it tops contain three different items,
|
||||
but the top cell "wins" over the two topped cells.
|
||||
|
||||
If this heap invariant is protected at all time, index 0 is clearly
|
||||
the overall winner. The simplest algorithmic way to remove it and
|
||||
find the "next" winner is to move some loser (let's say cell 30 in the
|
||||
diagram above) into the 0 position, and then percolate this new 0 down
|
||||
the tree, exchanging values, until the invariant is re-established.
|
||||
This is clearly logarithmic on the total number of items in the tree.
|
||||
By iterating over all items, you get an O(n log n) sort.
|
||||
|
||||
A nice feature of this sort is that you can efficiently insert new
|
||||
items while the sort is going on, provided that the inserted items are
|
||||
not "better" than the last 0'th element you extracted. This is
|
||||
especially useful in simulation contexts, where the tree holds all
|
||||
incoming events, and the "win" condition means the smallest scheduled
|
||||
time. When an event schedule other events for execution, they are
|
||||
scheduled into the future, so they can easily go into the heap. So, a
|
||||
heap is a good structure for implementing schedulers (this is what I
|
||||
used for my MIDI sequencer :-).
|
||||
|
||||
Various structures for implementing schedulers have been extensively
|
||||
studied, and heaps are good for this, as they are reasonably speedy,
|
||||
the speed is almost constant, and the worst case is not much different
|
||||
than the average case. However, there are other representations which
|
||||
are more efficient overall, yet the worst cases might be terrible.
|
||||
|
||||
Heaps are also very useful in big disk sorts. You most probably all
|
||||
know that a big sort implies producing "runs" (which are pre-sorted
|
||||
sequences, which size is usually related to the amount of CPU memory),
|
||||
followed by a merging passes for these runs, which merging is often
|
||||
very cleverly organised\footnote{The disk balancing algorithms which
|
||||
are current, nowadays, are
|
||||
more annoying than clever, and this is a consequence of the seeking
|
||||
capabilities of the disks. On devices which cannot seek, like big
|
||||
tape drives, the story was quite different, and one had to be very
|
||||
clever to ensure (far in advance) that each tape movement will be the
|
||||
most effective possible (that is, will best participate at
|
||||
"progressing" the merge). Some tapes were even able to read
|
||||
backwards, and this was also used to avoid the rewinding time.
|
||||
Believe me, real good tape sorts were quite spectacular to watch!
|
||||
From all times, sorting has always been a Great Art! :-)}.
|
||||
It is very important that the initial
|
||||
sort produces the longest runs possible. Tournaments are a good way
|
||||
to that. If, using all the memory available to hold a tournament, you
|
||||
replace and percolate items that happen to fit the current run, you'll
|
||||
produce runs which are twice the size of the memory for random input,
|
||||
and much better for input fuzzily ordered.
|
||||
|
||||
Moreover, if you output the 0'th item on disk and get an input which
|
||||
may not fit in the current tournament (because the value "wins" over
|
||||
the last output value), it cannot fit in the heap, so the size of the
|
||||
heap decreases. The freed memory could be cleverly reused immediately
|
||||
for progressively building a second heap, which grows at exactly the
|
||||
same rate the first heap is melting. When the first heap completely
|
||||
vanishes, you switch heaps and start a new run. Clever and quite
|
||||
effective!
|
||||
|
||||
In a word, heaps are useful memory structures to know. I use them in
|
||||
a few applications, and I think it is good to keep a `heap' module
|
||||
around. :-)
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue