SIM110: any() is ~3x slower than the code it replaces

[cclauss]

Builtins are also more efficient than for loops.

Let's not promise performance because this code transformation does not deliver.

Benchmark written by @dcbaker

any() seems to be about 1/3 as fast (Python 3.11.9, NixOS):

loop = 'abcdef'.split()
found = 'f'
nfound = 'g'


def test1():
    for x in loop:
        if x == found:
            return True
    return False


def test2():
    return any(x == found for x in loop)


def test3():
    for x in loop:
        if x == nfound:
            return True
    return False


def test4():
    return any(x == nfound for x in loop)


if __name__ == "__main__":
    import timeit

    print('for loop (found)    :', timeit.timeit(test1))
    print('for loop (not found):', timeit.timeit(test3))
    print('any() (found)       :', timeit.timeit(test2))
    print('any() (not found)   :', timeit.timeit(test4))

for loop (found)    : 0.051076093994197436
for loop (not found): 0.04388196699437685
any() (found)       : 0.15422860698890872
any() (not found)   : 0.15568504799739458

I have retested with longer lists and on multiple Python versions with similar results.

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #12746 will degrade performances by 6.3%

_{Comparing cclauss:patch-1 (8fbf9d1) with main (6d9205e)}

Summary

⚡ 1 improvements
❌ 1 regressions
✅ 30 untouched benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	main	cclauss:patch-1	Change
❌	linter/all-rules[numpy/globals.py]	725.1 µs	773.8 µs	-6.3%
⚡	linter/default-rules[pydantic/types.py]	1.9 ms	1.8 ms	+4.12%

[github-actions]

ruff-ecosystem results

Linter (stable)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.

Linter (preview)

✅ ecosystem check detected no linter changes.