# The beauty of numpy

I’ve been beefing up on my algorithms lately by trying to finish a programming competition problem a day. And, just for kicks and practice, I’ve been doing these problems in python.

I really like python so far. It’s quick and dirty and great. The problem though, is that some of the expressiveness that makes it great costs speed. Loads of it. The problem I was working on necessitated working with fairly large data sets, and my program that needed to run in less than two seconds was instead taking 15-20s.

I tried profiling my program with cProfile, and it told me that everything was slow.

So I did what any programmer worth squat does: I looked online for an answer. The interwebs seemed to suggest that writing efficient python requires learning numpy, a python library that provides efficient ways to work with numbers and matrices. Despite my resistance to learning a new library, I decided that it was worth a try.

In an effort to do as little work as possible, I decided to start by converting only a small portion of my program to use numpy. Here’s the portion of my program that reads the input, sans numpy:

``````def main():
while True:
m, n = map(int, raw_input().split())

if m == n == 0:
break

live_cells_count = int(raw_input())

live_cells_unpaired = []
while len(live_cells_unpaired) < (live_cells_count * 2):
live_cells_unpaired.extend(map(int, raw_input().split()))

live_cells = [live_cells_unpaired[i:i+2] for i in range(0, len(live_cells_unpaired), 2)]
generations = int(raw_input())

# In form grid[ring][cell]
grid = [[([i, j] in live_cells) for j in range(n)] for i in range(m)]``````

And here’s the same portion with numpy:

``````def main():
while True:
m, n = map(int, raw_input().split())

if m == n == 0:
break

live_cells_count = int(raw_input())
live_cells_unpaired = []
while len(live_cells_unpaired) < (live_cells_count * 2):
live_cells_unpaired.extend(map(int, raw_input().split()))

live_cells = [live_cells_unpaired[i:i+2] for i in range(0, len(live_cells_unpaired), 2)]
grid = np.zeros((m, n), bool)

for live_cell in live_cells:
grid[live_cell, live_cell] = True

generations = int(raw_input())``````

They look almost identical. The difference? Without numpy, the input takes some 8 seconds to read in. With numpy, it takes .2s.

Sold.