Check if all the elements of a Julia array are equal
Great question @tparker and great answer @ColinTBowers. While trying to think about them both, it occurred to me to try the straight-forward old-school Julian way-of-the-for
-loop. The result was faster on the important input of a long vector of identical elements, so I'm adding this note. Also, the function name allequal
seems to be appropriate enough to mention. So here are the variants:
allequal_1(x) = all(y->y==x[1],x)# allequal_2(x) used to be erroneously defined as foldl(==,x) @inline function allequal_3(x) length(x) < 2 && return true e1 = x[1] i = 2 @inbounds for i=2:length(x) x[i] == e1 || return false end return trueend
And the benchmark:
julia> using BenchmarkToolsjulia> v = fill(1,10_000_000); # long vector of 1sjulia> allequal_1(v)truejulia> allequal_3(v)truejulia> @btime allequal_1($v); 9.573 ms (1 allocation: 16 bytes)julia> @btime allequal_3($v); 6.853 ms (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
UPDATE: Another important case to benchmark is when there is a short-circuit opportunity. So (as requested in commment):
julia> v[100] = 22julia> allequal_1(v),allequal_2(v),allequal_3(v)(false, false, false)julia> @btime allequal_1($v); 108.946 ns (1 allocation: 16 bytes)julia> @btime allequal_3($v); 68.221 ns (0 allocations: 0 bytes)
All things being equal, a for
version should get to be allequal
in Base.
all
is the right solution, but you want the method all(p, itr)
for predicate p
and iterable itr
, since it will employ short-circuiting behaviour (break as soon as a false
is found). So:
all(y->y==x[1], x)
To see the difference, you can run the following little speed test:
for n = 100000:250000:1100000 x = rand(1:2, n); @time all(x .== x[1]); @time all(y->y==x[1], x); println("------------------------")end
Ignore the first iteration as it is timing compile time.
0.000177 seconds (22 allocations: 17.266 KiB) 0.006155 seconds (976 allocations: 55.062 KiB)------------------------ 0.000531 seconds (23 allocations: 47.719 KiB) 0.000003 seconds (1 allocation: 16 bytes)------------------------ 0.000872 seconds (23 allocations: 78.219 KiB) 0.000001 seconds (1 allocation: 16 bytes)------------------------ 0.001210 seconds (23 allocations: 108.781 KiB) 0.000001 seconds (1 allocation: 16 bytes)------------------------ 0.001538 seconds (23 allocations: 139.281 KiB) 0.000002 seconds (1 allocation: 16 bytes)
The first solution is fairly obviously O(n), while the second is O(1) at best and O(n) at worst (depending on the data generating process for itr
).