优化Python字典访问代码
问题: 我已经把我的Python程序剖析得面目全非了,有一个函数正在减慢一切。它大量使用Python字典,因此我可能没有以最佳方式使用它们。如果我不能让它运行得更快,我将不得不用C++来重写它,所以有人能帮助我在Python中优化它吗? 我希望我已经给出了正确的解释,并且您可以理解我的代码!提前感谢您的帮助 我的代码: 这是一个有问题的函数,使用。我正在运行Python 2.7 我对第363行、第389行和第405行尤其感到困惑,在这些行中,带有两个变量比较的优化Python字典访问代码,python,optimization,dictionary,sparse-matrix,Python,Optimization,Dictionary,Sparse Matrix,问题: 我已经把我的Python程序剖析得面目全非了,有一个函数正在减慢一切。它大量使用Python字典,因此我可能没有以最佳方式使用它们。如果我不能让它运行得更快,我将不得不用C++来重写它,所以有人能帮助我在Python中优化它吗? 我希望我已经给出了正确的解释,并且您可以理解我的代码!提前感谢您的帮助 我的代码: 这是一个有问题的函数,使用。我正在运行Python 2.7 我对第363行、第389行和第405行尤其感到困惑,在这些行中,带有两个变量比较的if语句似乎花费了过多的时间 我曾考
if
语句似乎花费了过多的时间
我曾考虑过使用(就像使用稀疏矩阵一样),但我认为这不合适,因为:(1)我没有使用整数为我的矩阵编制索引(我使用的是对象实例);(2)我没有在矩阵中存储简单的数据类型(我存储的是浮点和对象实例的元组)。
但我很愿意被说服。
如果有人知道NumPy的稀疏矩阵性能和Python的哈希表,我会感兴趣的
很抱歉,我没有给出一个简单的例子,你可以运行,但这个功能是捆绑在一个更大的项目,我无法解决如何设置一个简单的例子来测试它,没有给你我的一半代码基础
Timer unit: 3.33366e-10 s
File: routing_distances.py
Function: propagate_distances_node at line 328
Total time: 807.234 s
Line # Hits Time Per Hit % Time Line Contents
328 @profile
329 def propagate_distances_node(self, node_a, cutoff_distance=200):
330
331 # a makes sure its immediate neighbours are correctly in its distance table
332 # because its immediate neighbours may change as binds/folding change
333 737753 3733642341 5060.8 0.2 for (node_b, neighbour_distance_b_a) in self.neighbours[node_a].iteritems():
334 512120 2077788924 4057.2 0.1 use_neighbour_link = False
335
336 512120 2465798454 4814.9 0.1 if(node_b not in self.node_distances[node_a]): # a doesn't know distance to b
337 15857 66075687 4167.0 0.0 use_neighbour_link = True
338 else: # a does know distance to b
339 496263 2390534838 4817.1 0.1 (node_distance_b_a, next_node) = self.node_distances[node_a][node_b]
340 496263 2058112872 4147.2 0.1 if(node_distance_b_a > neighbour_distance_b_a): # neighbour distance is shorter
341 81 331794 4096.2 0.0 use_neighbour_link = True
342 496182 2665644192 5372.3 0.1 elif((None == next_node) and (float('+inf') == neighbour_distance_b_a)): # direct route that has just broken
343 75 313623 4181.6 0.0 use_neighbour_link = True
344
345 512120 1992514932 3890.7 0.1 if(use_neighbour_link):
346 16013 78149007 4880.3 0.0 self.node_distances[node_a][node_b] = (neighbour_distance_b_a, None)
347 16013 83489949 5213.9 0.0 self.nodes_changed.add(node_a)
348
349 ## Affinity distances update
350 16013 86020794 5371.9 0.0 if((node_a.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
351 164 3950487 24088.3 0.0 self.add_affinityDistance(node_a, node_b, self.chemistry.affinity(node_a.data, node_b.data))
352
353 # a sends its table to all its immediate neighbours
354 737753 3549685140 4811.5 0.1 for (node_b, neighbour_distance_b_a) in self.neighbours[node_a].iteritems():
355 512120 2129343210 4157.9 0.1 node_b_changed = False
356
357 # b integrates a's distance table with its own
358 512120 2203821081 4303.3 0.1 node_b_chemical = node_b.chemical
359 512120 2409257898 4704.5 0.1 node_b_distances = node_b_chemical.node_distances[node_b]
360
361 # For all b's routes (to c) that go to a first, update their distances
362 41756882 183992040153 4406.3 7.6 for node_c, (distance_b_c, node_after_b) in node_b_distances.iteritems(): # Think it's ok to modify items while iterating over them (just not insert/delete) (seems to work ok)
363 41244762 172425596985 4180.5 7.1 if(node_after_b == node_a):
364
365 16673654 64255631616 3853.7 2.7 try:
366 16673654 88781802534 5324.7 3.7 distance_b_a_c = neighbour_distance_b_a + self.node_distances[node_a][node_c][0]
367 187083 929898684 4970.5 0.0 except KeyError:
368 187083 1056787479 5648.8 0.0 distance_b_a_c = float('+inf')
369
370 16673654 69374705256 4160.7 2.9 if(distance_b_c != distance_b_a_c): # a's distance to c has changed
371 710083 3136751361 4417.4 0.1 node_b_distances[node_c] = (distance_b_a_c, node_a)
372 710083 2848845276 4012.0 0.1 node_b_changed = True
373
374 ## Affinity distances update
375 710083 3484577241 4907.3 0.1 if((node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_c.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
376 99592 1591029009 15975.5 0.1 node_b_chemical.add_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c, self.chemistry.affinity(node_b.data, node_c.data))
377
378 # If distance got longer, then ask b's neighbours to update
379 ## TODO: document this!
380 16673654 70998570837 4258.1 2.9 if(distance_b_a_c > distance_b_c):
381 #for (node, neighbour_distance) in node_b_chemical.neighbours[node_b].iteritems():
382 1702852 7413182064 4353.4 0.3 for node in node_b_chemical.neighbours[node_b]:
383 1204903 5912053272 4906.7 0.2 node.chemical.nodes_changed.add(node)
384
385 # Look for routes from a to c that are quicker than ones b knows already
386 42076729 184216680432 4378.1 7.6 for node_c, (distance_a_c, node_after_a) in self.node_distances[node_a].iteritems():
387
388 41564609 171150289218 4117.7 7.1 node_b_update = False
389 41564609 172040284089 4139.1 7.1 if(node_c == node_b): # a-b path
390 512120 2040112548 3983.7 0.1 pass
391 41052489 169406668962 4126.6 7.0 elif(node_after_a == node_b): # a-b-a-b path
392 16251407 63918804600 3933.1 2.6 pass
393 24801082 101577038778 4095.7 4.2 elif(node_c in node_b_distances): # b can already get to c
394 24004846 103404357180 4307.6 4.3 (distance_b_c, node_after_b) = node_b_distances[node_c]
395 24004846 102717271836 4279.0 4.2 if(node_after_b != node_a): # b doesn't already go to a first
396 7518275 31858204500 4237.4 1.3 distance_b_a_c = neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c
397 7518275 33470022717 4451.8 1.4 if(distance_b_a_c < distance_b_c): # quicker to go via a
398 225357 956440656 4244.1 0.0 node_b_update = True
399 else: # b can't already get to c
400 796236 3415455549 4289.5 0.1 distance_b_a_c = neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c
401 796236 3412145520 4285.3 0.1 if(distance_b_a_c < cutoff_distance): # not too for to go
402 593352 2514800052 4238.3 0.1 node_b_update = True
403
404 ## Affinity distances update
405 41564609 164585250189 3959.7 6.8 if node_b_update:
406 818709 3933555120 4804.6 0.2 node_b_distances[node_c] = (distance_b_a_c, node_a)
407 818709 4151464335 5070.7 0.2 if((node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_c.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
408 104293 1704446289 16342.9 0.1 node_b_chemical.add_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c, self.chemistry.affinity(node_b.data, node_c.data))
409 818709 3557529531 4345.3 0.1 node_b_changed = True
410
411 # If any of node b's rows have exceeded the cutoff distance, then remove them
412 42350234 197075504439 4653.5 8.1 for node_c, (distance_b_c, node_after_b) in node_b_distances.items(): # Can't use iteritems() here, as deleting from the dictionary
413 41838114 180297579789 4309.4 7.4 if(distance_b_c > cutoff_distance):
414 206296 894881754 4337.9 0.0 del node_b_distances[node_c]
415 206296 860508045 4171.2 0.0 node_b_changed = True
416
417 ## Affinity distances update
418 206296 4698692217 22776.5 0.2 node_b_chemical.del_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c)
419
420 # If we've modified node_b's distance table, tell its chemical to update accordingly
421 512120 2130466347 4160.1 0.1 if(node_b_changed):
422 217858 1201064454 5513.1 0.0 node_b_chemical.nodes_changed.add(node_b)
423
424 # Remove any neighbours that have infinite distance (have just unbound)
425 ## TODO: not sure what difference it makes to do this here rather than above (after updating self.node_distances for neighbours)
426 ## but doing it above seems to break the walker's movement
427 737753 3830386968 5192.0 0.2 for (node_b, neighbour_distance_b_a) in self.neighbours[node_a].items(): # Can't use iteritems() here, as deleting from the dictionary
428 512120 2249770068 4393.1 0.1 if(neighbour_distance_b_a > cutoff_distance):
429 150 747747 4985.0 0.0 del self.neighbours[node_a][node_b]
430
431 ## Affinity distances update
432 150 2148813 14325.4 0.0 self.del_affinityDistance(node_a, node_b)
由于拓扑更改,两个相距很远(或根本没有连接)的节点可能会变得很近。发生这种情况时,条目将添加到此矩阵中。由于阈值设置,两个节点可能会相距太远而无法关心。发生这种情况时,将从此矩阵中删除条目
self.neights
矩阵类似于self.node\u distance
,但包含有关网络中直接链路(边)的信息<代码>自身。通过化学反应,邻居不断地从外部对此功能进行修改。这就是网络拓扑更改的来源
我遇到问题的实际函数:propagate\u distance\u node()。给定一个节点,node\u a
,该函数确保node\u a
的邻居正确地位于距离矩阵中(拓扑更改)。然后,该函数将节点a
的路由表发送到网络中所有节点a
的近邻。它将节点的路由表与每个邻居自己的路由表集成在一起
在我程序的其余部分中,重复调用传播距离\u node()
函数,直到距离矩阵收敛。自上次更新以来已更改其路由表的节点的集合“self.nodes\u changed
”将被维护。在我的算法的每次迭代中,都会选择这些节点的随机子集,并对它们调用propagate\u distance\u node()
。这意味着节点以异步和随机的方式分布其路由表。当集合self.nodes\u changed
变为空时,该算法收敛于真距离矩阵
“亲缘距离”部分(add_affinityDistance
和del_affinityDistance
)是距离矩阵(小)子矩阵的缓存,由程序的不同部分使用
我这么做的原因是我在模拟参与反应的化学物质的计算类似物,作为我博士学位的一部分。“化学”是一个“原子”图(图中的节点)。将两种化学物质结合在一起,模拟它们的两个图形被新边连接。一个化学反应发生(通过一个复杂的过程,在这里不相关),改变了图形的拓扑结构。但反应中发生的情况取决于组成化学物质的不同原子之间的距离。因此,对于模拟中的每个原子,我想知道它与哪些其他原子接近。稀疏的阈值距离矩阵是存储这些信息的最有效方法。由于网络的拓扑结构随着反应的发生而变化,因此我需要更新矩阵。A是我能想出的最快的方法。我不需要更复杂的路由协议,因为像路由循环这样的事情不会发生在我的特定应用程序中(因为我的化学品是如何构造的)。我这样做的原因是随机的,这样我就可以将化学反应过程与距离的扩展交织在一起,并在反应发生时模拟一种随着时间逐渐改变形状的化学反应(而不是瞬间改变形状)
此函数中的self
是表示化学品的对象。self.node\u distance.keys()
中的节点是构成化学物质的原子。self.node\u distance[node\u x].keys()中的节点是来自化学品的节点,可能是来自与化学品结合(并与之反应)的任何化学品的节点
更新:
我尝试用node_x是node_y
替换node_x==node_y
的每个实例(根据@Sven Marnach的评论),但它减慢了速度!(我没想到!)
我最初的配置文件运行了807.234秒,但经过这次修改后,它增加到了895.895秒。对不起,我做得不对!我使用了一行接一行,这(在我的代码中)有太多的差异(90秒的差异都在噪音中)。正确地分析它时,是
比=
快得多。使用时,我使用=
的代码花费了34.394s,但使用is
的代码花费了33.535s(我可以确认它没有噪音)
更新:
现有图书馆
我不确定是否会有一个现有的库可以满足我的要求,因为我的要求不同寻常:
我需要计算短距离
self.node_distances = { node_1 : { node_2 : (2.0, None),
node_3 : (5.7, node_2),
node_5 : (22.9, node_2) },
node_2 : { node_1 : (2.0, None),
node_3 : (3.7, None),
node_5 : (20.9, node_7)},
...etc...
>>> class B(object):
... def __eq__(self, other):
... print "B.__eq__()"
... return False
...
>>> class A(object):
... def __eq__(self, other):
... print "A.__eq__()"
... return False
...
>>> a = A()
>>> b = B()
>>> a == b
A.__eq__()
False
>>> b == a
B.__eq__()
False
>>>
#!/usr/bin/env python
# test.py
class A(object):
def __init__(self, id):
self.id = id
class B(A):
def __eq__(self, other):
return self.id == other.id
@profile
def main():
list_a = []
list_b = []
for x in range(100000):
list_a.append(A(x))
list_b.append(B(x))
ob_a = A(1)
ob_b = B(1)
for ob in list_a:
if ob == ob_a:
x = True
if ob is ob_a:
x = True
if ob.id == ob_a.id:
x = True
if ob.id == 1:
x = True
for ob in list_b:
if ob == ob_b:
x = True
if ob is ob_b:
x = True
if ob.id == ob_b.id:
x = True
if ob.id == 1:
x = True
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
Timer unit: 1e-06 s
File: test.py Function: main at line 10 Total time: 5.52964 s
Line # Hits Time Per Hit % Time Line Contents
==============================================================
10 @profile
11 def main():
12 1 5 5.0 0.0 list_a = []
13 1 3 3.0 0.0 list_b = []
14 100001 360677 3.6 6.5 for x in range(100000):
15 100000 763593 7.6 13.8 list_a.append(A(x))
16 100000 924822 9.2 16.7 list_b.append(B(x))
17
18 1 14 14.0 0.0 ob_a = A(1)
19 1 5 5.0 0.0 ob_b = B(1)
20 100001 500454 5.0 9.1 for ob in list_a:
21 100000 267252 2.7 4.8 if ob == ob_a:
22 x = True
23 100000 259075 2.6 4.7 if ob is ob_a:
24 x = True
25 100000 539683 5.4 9.8 if ob.id == ob_a.id:
26 1 3 3.0 0.0 x = True
27 100000 271519 2.7 4.9 if ob.id == 1:
28 1 3 3.0 0.0 x = True
29 100001 296736 3.0 5.4 for ob in list_b:
30 100000 472204 4.7 8.5 if ob == ob_b:
31 1 4 4.0 0.0 x = True
32 100000 283165 2.8 5.1 if ob is ob_b:
33 x = True
34 100000 298839 3.0 5.4 if ob.id == ob_b.id:
35 1 3 3.0 0.0 x = True
36 100000 291576 2.9 5.3 if ob.id == 1:
37 1 3 3.0 0.0 x = True
vmstat 10 100
import psyco
psyco.full()
Line # Hits Time Per Hit % Time Line Contents
412 42350234 197075504439 4653.5 8.1 for node_c, (distance_b_c, node_after_b) in node_b_distances.items(): # Can't use iteritems() here, as deleting from the dictionary
386 42076729 184216680432 4378.1 7.6 for node_c, (distance_a_c, node_after_a) in self.node_distances[node_a].iteritems():
362 41756882 183992040153 4406.3 7.6 for node_c, (distance_b_c, node_after_b) in node_b_distances.iteritems(): # Think it's ok to modify items while iterating over them (just not insert/delete) (seems to work ok)
413 41838114 180297579789 4309.4 7.4 if(distance_b_c > cutoff_distance):
363 41244762 172425596985 4180.5 7.1 if(node_after_b == node_a):
389 41564609 172040284089 4139.1 7.1 if(node_c == node_b): # a-b path
388 41564609 171150289218 4117.7 7.1 node_b_update = False
391 41052489 169406668962 4126.6 7 elif(node_after_a == node_b): # a-b-a-b path
405 41564609 164585250189 3959.7 6.8 if node_b_update:
394 24004846 103404357180 4307.6 4.3 (distance_b_c, node_after_b) = node_b_distances[node_c]
395 24004846 102717271836 4279 4.2 if(node_after_b != node_a): # b doesn't already go to a first
393 24801082 101577038778 4095.7 4.2 elif(node_c in node_b_distances): # b can already get to c
if (node_after_a is not node_b) and (node_c is not node_b):
# neither a-b-a-b nor a-b path
if (node_c in node_b_distances): # b can already get to c
(distance_b_c, node_after_b) = node_b_distances[node_c]
if (node_after_b is not node_a): # b doesn't already go to a first
distance_b_a_c = neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c
if (distance_b_a_c < distance_b_c): # quicker to go via a
node_b_update = T
else: # b can't already get to c
distance_b_a_c = neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c
if (distance_b_a_c < cutoff_distance): # not too for to go
node_b_update = T
Timer unit: 3.33366e-10 s
File: routing_distances.py
Function: propagate_distances_node at line 328
Total time: 760.74 s
Line # Hits Time Per Hit % Time Line Contents
328 @profile
329 def propagate_distances_node(self, node_a, cutoff_distance=200):
330
331 # a makes sure its immediate neighbours are correctly in its distance table
332 # because its immediate neighbours may change as binds/folding change
333 791349 4158169713 5254.5 0.2 for (node_b, neighbour_distance_b_a) in self.neighbours[node_a].iteritems():
334 550522 2331886050 4235.8 0.1 use_neighbour_link = False
335
336 550522 2935995237 5333.1 0.1 if(node_b not in self.node_distances[node_a]): # a doesn't know distance to b
337 15931 68829156 4320.5 0.0 use_neighbour_link = True
338 else: # a does know distance to b
339 534591 2728134153 5103.2 0.1 (node_distance_b_a, next_node) = self.node_distances[node_a][node_b]
340 534591 2376374859 4445.2 0.1 if(node_distance_b_a > neighbour_distance_b_a): # neighbour distance is shorter
341 78 347355 4453.3 0.0 use_neighbour_link = True
342 534513 3145889079 5885.5 0.1 elif((None is next_node) and (float('+inf') == neighbour_distance_b_a)): # direct route that has just broken
343 74 327600 4427.0 0.0 use_neighbour_link = True
344
345 550522 2414669022 4386.1 0.1 if(use_neighbour_link):
346 16083 81850626 5089.3 0.0 self.node_distances[node_a][node_b] = (neighbour_distance_b_a, None)
347 16083 87064200 5413.4 0.0 self.nodes_changed.add(node_a)
348
349 ## Affinity distances update
350 16083 86580603 5383.4 0.0 if((node_a.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
351 234 6656868 28448.2 0.0 self.add_affinityDistance(node_a, node_b, self.chemistry.affinity(node_a.data, node_b.data))
352
353 # a sends its table to all its immediate neighbours
354 791349 4034651958 5098.4 0.2 for (node_b, neighbour_distance_b_a) in self.neighbours[node_a].iteritems():
355 550522 2392248546 4345.4 0.1 node_b_changed = False
356
357 # b integrates a's distance table with its own
358 550522 2520330696 4578.1 0.1 node_b_chemical = node_b.chemical
359 550522 2734341975 4966.8 0.1 node_b_distances = node_b_chemical.node_distances[node_b]
360
361 # For all b's routes (to c) that go to a first, update their distances
362 46679347 222161837193 4759.3 9.7 for node_c, (distance_b_c, node_after_b) in node_b_distances.iteritems(): # Think it's ok to modify items while iterating over them (just not insert/delete) (seems to work ok)
363 46128825 211963639122 4595.0 9.3 if(node_after_b is node_a):
364
365 18677439 79225517916 4241.8 3.5 try:
366 18677439 101527287264 5435.8 4.4 distance_b_a_c = neighbour_distance_b_a + self.node_distances[node_a][node_c][0]
367 181510 985441680 5429.1 0.0 except KeyError:
368 181510 1166118921 6424.5 0.1 distance_b_a_c = float('+inf')
369
370 18677439 89626381965 4798.6 3.9 if(distance_b_c != distance_b_a_c): # a's distance to c has changed
371 692131 3352970709 4844.4 0.1 node_b_distances[node_c] = (distance_b_a_c, node_a)
372 692131 3066946866 4431.2 0.1 node_b_changed = True
373
374 ## Affinity distances update
375 692131 3808548270 5502.6 0.2 if((node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_c.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
376 96794 1655818011 17106.6 0.1 node_b_chemical.add_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c, self.chemistry.affinity(node_b.data, node_c.data))
377
378 # If distance got longer, then ask b's neighbours to update
379 ## TODO: document this!
380 18677439 88838493705 4756.5 3.9 if(distance_b_a_c > distance_b_c):
381 #for (node, neighbour_distance) in node_b_chemical.neighbours[node_b].iteritems():
382 1656796 7949850642 4798.3 0.3 for node in node_b_chemical.neighbours[node_b]:
383 1172486 6307264854 5379.4 0.3 node.chemical.nodes_changed.add(node)
384
385 # Look for routes from a to c that are quicker than ones b knows already
386 46999631 227198060532 4834.0 10.0 for node_c, (distance_a_c, node_after_a) in self.node_distances[node_a].iteritems():
387
388 46449109 218024862372 4693.8 9.6 if((node_after_a is not node_b) and # not a-b-a-b path
389 28049321 126269403795 4501.7 5.5 (node_c is not node_b)): # not a-b path
390 27768341 121588366824 4378.7 5.3 try: # Assume node_c in node_b_distances ('try' block will raise KeyError if not)
391 27768341 159413637753 5740.8 7.0 if((node_b_distances[node_c][1] is not node_a) and # b doesn't already go to a first
392 8462467 51890478453 6131.8 2.3 ((neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c) < node_b_distances[node_c][0])):
393
394 # Found a route
395 224593 1168129548 5201.1 0.1 node_b_distances[node_c] = (neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c, node_a)
396 ## Affinity distances update
397 224593 1274631354 5675.3 0.1 if((node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_c.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
398 32108 551523249 17177.1 0.0 node_b_chemical.add_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c, self.chemistry.affinity(node_b.data, node_c.data))
399 224593 1165878108 5191.1 0.1 node_b_changed = True
400
401 809945 4449080808 5493.1 0.2 except KeyError:
402 # b can't already get to c (node_c not in node_b_distances)
403 809945 4208032422 5195.5 0.2 if((neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c) < cutoff_distance): # not too for to go
404
405 # These lines of code copied, for efficiency
406 # (most of the time, the 'try' block succeeds, so don't bother testing for (node_c in node_b_distances))
407 # Found a route
408 587726 3162939543 5381.7 0.1 node_b_distances[node_c] = (neighbour_distance_b_a + distance_a_c, node_a)
409 ## Affinity distances update
410 587726 3363869061 5723.5 0.1 if((node_b.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE) and (node_c.type == Atom.BINDING_SITE)):
411 71659 1258910784 17568.1 0.1 node_b_chemical.add_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c, self.chemistry.affinity(node_b.data, node_c.data))
412 587726 2706161481 4604.5 0.1 node_b_changed = True
413
414
415
416 # If any of node b's rows have exceeded the cutoff distance, then remove them
417 47267073 239847142446 5074.3 10.5 for node_c, (distance_b_c, node_after_b) in node_b_distances.items(): # Can't use iteritems() here, as deleting from the dictionary
418 46716551 242694352980 5195.0 10.6 if(distance_b_c > cutoff_distance):
419 200755 967443975 4819.0 0.0 del node_b_distances[node_c]
420 200755 930470616 4634.9 0.0 node_b_changed = True
421
422 ## Affinity distances update
423 200755 4717125063 23496.9 0.2 node_b_chemical.del_affinityDistance(node_b, node_c)
424
425 # If we've modified node_b's distance table, tell its chemical to update accordingly
426 550522 2684634615 4876.5 0.1 if(node_b_changed):
427 235034 1383213780 5885.2 0.1 node_b_chemical.nodes_changed.add(node_b)
428
429 # Remove any neighbours that have infinite distance (have just unbound)
430 ## TODO: not sure what difference it makes to do this here rather than above (after updating self.node_distances for neighbours)
431 ## but doing it above seems to break the walker's movement
432 791349 4367879451 5519.5 0.2 for (node_b, neighbour_distance_b_a) in self.neighbours[node_a].items(): # Can't use iteritems() here, as deleting from the dictionary
433 550522 2968919613 5392.9 0.1 if(neighbour_distance_b_a > cutoff_distance):
434 148 775638 5240.8 0.0 del self.neighbours[node_a][node_b]
435
436 ## Affinity distances update
437 148 2096343 14164.5 0.0 self.del_affinityDistance(node_a, node_b)