Python Memory Error while iterating to a big range

后端 未结 3 2022
栀梦
栀梦 2021-01-14 23:44
total = 0
x = 2**32
for i in range(x):
    total = total + i;
print(total) 

I am getting a MemoryError<

3条回答
  •  时光说笑
    2021-01-15 00:15

    This is what happens when you try to create a list that contains the first 232 non-negative integers (I'm using Python 2.7.11 on a Windows 10 system):

    >>> for i in range(2**32): pass
    ... 
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "", line 1, in 
    OverflowError: range() result has too many items
    

    One might expect that if the problem is to have such a large number of items simultaneously in memory, the solution could be that of handling one item at a time through a generator... but it is not:

    >>> for i in xrange(2**32): pass
    ... 
    Traceback (most recent call last):
      File "", line 1, in 
    OverflowError: Python int too large to convert to C long
    

    The documentation of xrange() built-in function explains why this error occurs:

    CPython implementation detail: xrange() is intended to be simple and fast. Implementations may impose restrictions to achieve this. The C implementation of Python restricts all arguments to native C longs (“short” Python integers), and also requires that the number of elements fit in a native C long.

    The issue is that 232 cannot be passed as an input argument to xrange because that number is greater than the maximum "short" integer in Python. Try this to convince yourself:

    >>> import sys
    >>> sys.maxint       # 2**31 - 1
    2147483647
    >>> sys.maxint + 1   # 2**31 is automatically converted to "long" int
    2147483648L
    >>> 2**31
    2147483648L
    

    You could use nested for loops if you need to repeatedly perform a computation more than 231 times (234 times in the following example):

    >>> loops = 0
    >>> for i in xrange(2**4):
    ...    for j in xrange(2**30):
    ...        # do stuff
    ...        loops += 1
    ...
    >>> loops
    17179869184L
    >>> 2**34
    17179869184L
    

    The code above is a rather naïve workaround. A while loop seems to be a much more adequate solution:

    >>> loops = 0
    >>> while loops < 2**34:
    ...    # do stuff
    ...    loops += 1
    ...
    >>> loops
    17179869184L
    

提交回复
热议问题