As Uri Goren astutely noted above, the Python stdlib already implemented an efficient queue on your fortunate behalf: collections.deque
.
What Not to Do
Avoid reinventing the wheel by hand-rolling your own:
- Linked list implementation. While doing so reduces the worst-case time complexity of your
dequeue()
andenqueue()
methods to O(1), thecollections.deque
type already does so. It’s also thread-safe and presumably more space and time efficient, given its C-based heritage. - Python list implementation. As I note below, implementing the
enqueue()
methods in terms of a Python list increases its worst-case time complexity to O(n). Since removing the last item from a C-based array and hence Python list is a constant-time operation, implementing thedequeue()
method in terms of a Python list retains the same worst-case time complexity of O(1). But who cares?enqueue()
remains pitifully slow.
To quote the official deque
documentation:
Though
list
objects support similar operations, they are optimized for fast fixed-length operations and incur O(n) memory movement costs forpop(0)
andinsert(0, v)
operations which change both the size and position of the underlying data representation.
More critically, deque
also provides out-of-the-box support for a maximum length via the maxlen
parameter passed at initialization time, obviating the need for manual attempts to limit the queue size (which inevitably breaks thread safety due to race conditions implicit in if conditionals).
What to Do
Instead, implement your Queue
class in terms of the standard collections.deque
type as follows:
from collections import deque class Queue: ''' Thread-safe, memory-efficient, maximally-sized queue supporting queueing and dequeueing in worst-case O(1) time. ''' def __init__(self, max_size = 10): ''' Initialize this queue to the empty queue. Parameters ---------- max_size : int Maximum number of items contained in this queue. Defaults to 10. ''' self._queue = deque(maxlen=max_size) def enqueue(self, item): ''' Queues the passed item (i.e., pushes this item onto the tail of this queue). If this queue is already full, the item at the head of this queue is silently removed from this queue *before* the passed item is queued. ''' self._queue.append(item) def dequeue(self): ''' Dequeues (i.e., removes) the item at the head of this queue *and* returns this item. Raises ---------- IndexError If this queue is empty. ''' return self._queue.pop()
The proof is in the hellish pudding:
>>> queue = Queue() >>> queue.enqueue('Maiden in Black') >>> queue.enqueue('Maneater') >>> queue.enqueue('Maiden Astraea') >>> queue.enqueue('Flamelurker') >>> print(queue.dequeue()) Flamelurker >>> print(queue.dequeue()) Maiden Astraea >>> print(queue.dequeue()) Maneater >>> print(queue.dequeue()) Maiden in Black
It Is Dangerous to Go Alone
Actually, don’t do that either.
You’re better off just using a raw deque
object rather than attempting to manually encapsulate that object in a Queue
wrapper. The Queue
class defined above is given only as a trivial demonstration of the general-purpose utility of the deque
API.
The deque
class provides significantly more features, including:
…iteration, pickling,
len(d)
,reversed(d)
,copy.copy(d)
,copy.deepcopy(d)
, membership testing with the in operator, and subscript references such asd[-1]
.
Just use deque
anywhere a single- or double-ended queue is required. That is all.