Most Pythonic Way to Generate Random Strings of Fixed Length From Given Characters

Question

This is a spin-off of one of my earlier questions

Problem statement: Given a number N and an arbitrary (but non-empty) set/string/list of characters E, return a random string of length N made up of the characters in E.

What is the most pythonic way of doing this? I can go with ''.join(( random.choice(E) for i in xrange(N) )), but I'm looking for a better way of doing this. Is there a built-in function in random or perhaps itertools that can do this?

Bonus points if:

Fewer function calls
Fitting into one line
Better generalizability to any N and E
Better run-time performance

PS: This question is really just me being a Python connoisseur (if I may call myself that) and trying to find elegant and artistic ways of writing code. The reason I mention this is because it looks a little bit like homework and I want to assure the SO community that it is not.

possible duplicate of python random string generation with upper case letters and digits — outis
– outis, Commented Jan 19, 2012 at 10:19
are duplicates allowed? ie where N=2 and E='abc', is 'bb' an acceptable string? — Kenan Banks
– Kenan Banks, Commented Jan 20, 2012 at 15:52

DSM · Accepted Answer · 2012-01-19 00:10:49Z

9

''.join(random.sample(E*N, N))

although that won't work with sets, come to think of it. But frankly,

''.join(random.choice(E) for i in xrange(N))

is already pretty Pythonic -- it's simple, clear, and expressive.

The pythonicness that needs hours of thought is not the true pythonicness.

answered Jan 19, 2012 at 0:10

DSM

355k67 gold badges606 silver badges504 bronze badges

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

Andrew Clark · Accepted Answer · 2012-01-19 00:40:20Z

4

Your solution already looks pretty good, but here are some alternatives for the sake of completeness:

''.join(map(random.choice, [E]*N))

Or with itertools:

from itertools import repeat
''.join(map(random.choice, repeat(E, N)))

If you are on Python 2.x itertools.imap() would be more efficient than map() since it will not create the full list in memory.

Here is some interesting timing data (tested on Python 2.6):

>>> import timeit
>>> t1 = timeit.Timer("''.join(random.choice('abcdefghijkl') for i in xrange(3))", "import random")
>>> t2 = timeit.Timer("''.join(map(random.choice, ['abcdefghijkl']*3))", "import random")
>>> t3 = timeit.Timer("''.join(map(random.choice, repeat('abcdefghijkl', 3)))", "import random; from itertools import repeat")
>>> t4 = timeit.Timer("''.join(random.sample('abcdefghijkl'*3, 3))", "import random")
>>> t1.timeit(1000000)   # (random.choice(E) for i in xrange(N))  - OP
7.0744400024414062
>>> t2.timeit(1000000)   # map(random.choice, [E]*N)              - F.J
4.3570120334625244
>>> t3.timeit(1000000)   # map(random.choice, repeat(E, N))       - F.J
5.9411048889160156
>>> t4.timeit(1000000)   # random.sample(E*N, N)                  - DSM
6.9877378940582275

Apparently map(random.choice, [E]*N) is the winner, at least for small E and N.

edited Jan 19, 2012 at 0:40

answered Jan 19, 2012 at 0:13

Andrew Clark

210k36 gold badges286 silver badges310 bronze badges

1 Comment

DSM Over a year ago

Interesting. I think this data suggests that the OP's solution is the best. It's the most obvious and within a factor of two of the speed of the best-performing.

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

Most Pythonic Way to Generate Random Strings of Fixed Length From Given Characters

2 Answers 2

Comments

1 Comment

Your Answer

Linked

Hot Network Questions

Collectives™ on Stack Overflow

2 Answers 2

Comments

1 Comment

Your Answer

Sign up or log in

Post as a guest

Linked

Related