4 ms·

I didn't know about the array library, but "".join(map(chr, list)) would have been my first choice, partly for style and partly for avoiding string concat

I didn't know about the array library, but "".join(map(chr, list)) would have been my first choice, partly for style and partly for avoiding string concatenation (recent speedups aside).

hayd 9y ago
or `"".join([chr(ch) for ch in s])`. It's only 2-3x slower than the array solution, but a lot more rubust. The main issue IIUC is the original suggestion was O(N^2).
draw_down 9y ago
Yeah, exactly.