It is universally agreed that a list of n distinct symbols has n! permutations. However, when the symbols are not distinct, the most common convention, in mathemati
I'm accepting the answer of Gareth Rees as the most appealing explanation (short of an answer from the Python library designers), namely, that Python's itertools.permutations doesn't compare the values of the elements. Come to think of it, this is what the question asks about, but I see now how it could be seen as an advantage, depending on what one typically uses itertools.permutations for.
Just for completeness, I compared three methods of generating all distinct permutations. Method 1, which is very inefficient memory-wise and time-wise but requires the least new code, is to wrap Python's itertools.permutations, as in zeekay's answer. Method 2 is a generator-based version of C++'s next_permutation, from this blog post. Method 3 is something I wrote that is even closer to C++'s next_permutation algorithm; it modifies the list in-place (I haven't made it too general).
def next_permutationS(l):
n = len(l)
#Step 1: Find tail
last = n-1 #tail is from `last` to end
while last>0:
if l[last-1] < l[last]: break
last -= 1
#Step 2: Increase the number just before tail
if last>0:
small = l[last-1]
big = n-1
while l[big] <= small: big -= 1
l[last-1], l[big] = l[big], small
#Step 3: Reverse tail
i = last
j = n-1
while i < j:
l[i], l[j] = l[j], l[i]
i += 1
j -= 1
return last>0
Here are some results. I have even more respect for Python's built-in function now: it's about three to four times as fast as the other methods when the elements are all (or almost all) distinct. Of course, when there are many repeated elements, using it is a terrible idea.
Some results ("us" means microseconds):
l m_itertoolsp m_nextperm_b m_nextperm_s
[1, 1, 2] 5.98 us 12.3 us 7.54 us
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] 0.63 ms 2.69 ms 1.77 ms
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10] 6.93 s 13.68 s 8.75 s
[1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 6, 6] 3.12 ms 3.34 ms 2.19 ms
[1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3] 2400 ms 5.87 ms 3.63 ms
[1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2] 2320000 us 89.9 us 51.5 us
[1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4] 429000 ms 361 ms 228 ms
The code is here if anyone wants to explore.