| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \section{\module{heapq} --- | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  |          Heap queue algorithm} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \declaremodule{standard}{heapq} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \modulesynopsis{Heap queue algorithm (a.k.a. priority queue).} | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 19:46:42 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \moduleauthor{Kevin O'Connor}{} | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \sectionauthor{Guido van Rossum}{guido@python.org} | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 19:46:42 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | % Theoretical explanation:
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \sectionauthor{Fran\c cois Pinard}{} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \versionadded{2.3} | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | This module provides an implementation of the heap queue algorithm, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | also known as the priority queue algorithm. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 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. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:02:09 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | (b) Our pop method returns the smallest item, not the largest (called a | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | "min heap" in textbooks; a "max heap" is more common in texts because | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | of its suitability for in-place sorting). | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 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! | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:02:09 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | To create a heap, use a list initialized to \code{[]}, or you can | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | transform a populated list into a heap via function \function{heapify()}. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 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 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-07 18:56:08 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | heap invariant.  If the heap is empty, \exception{IndexError} is raised. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \end{funcdesc} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:02:09 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \begin{funcdesc}{heapify}{x} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | Transform list \var{x} into a heap, in-place, in linear time. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \end{funcdesc} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:53:28 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \begin{funcdesc}{heapreplace}{heap, item} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | Pop and return the smallest item from the \var{heap}, and also push | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | the new \var{item}.  The heap size doesn't change. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-07 18:56:08 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | If the heap is empty, \exception{IndexError} is raised. | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:53:28 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | This is more efficient than \function{heappop()} followed | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | by  \function{heappush()}, and can be more appropriate when using | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | a fixed-size heap.  Note that the value returned may be larger | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | than \var{item}!  That constrains reasonable uses of this routine. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \end{funcdesc} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | 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) | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:02:09 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | ... | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | >>> sorted = [] | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | >>> while heap: | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | ...     sorted.append(heappop(heap)) | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:02:09 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | ... | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | >>> print sorted | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9] | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | >>> data.sort() | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | >>> print data == sorted | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | True | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-03 18:02:09 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | >>> | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | \end{verbatim} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2004-06-10 05:03:17 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | The module also offers two general purpose functions based on heaps. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \begin{funcdesc}{nlargest}{iterable, n} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | Return a list with the \var{n} largest elements from the dataset defined | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | by \var{iterable}. Equivalent to:  \code{sorted(iterable, reverse=True)[:n]} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \versionadded{2.4}               | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \end{funcdesc} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \begin{funcdesc}{nsmallest}{iterable, n} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | Return a list with the \var{n} smallest elements from the dataset defined | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | by \var{iterable}. Equivalent to:  \code{sorted(iterable)[:n]} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \versionadded{2.4}               | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \end{funcdesc} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | Both functions perform best for smaller values of \var{n}.  For larger | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | values, it is more efficient to use the \function{sorted()} function.  Also, | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | when \code{n==1}, it is more efficient to use the builtin \function{min()} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | and \function{max()} functions. | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							| 
									
										
										
										
											2002-08-02 18:03:24 +00:00
										 |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | \subsection{Theory} | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | 
 | 
					
						
							|  |  |  |  | (This explanation is due to Fran<61>ois 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. :-) |