Most Efficient Python String Concatenation: Methods, Pitfalls, and Best Practices
Wed Aug 6th, 2025 — 13 days ago

Python String Concatenation: Most Efficient Methods and Pitfalls

Problem

  • What’s the fastest and most memory-efficient way to concatenate multiple strings in Python?
  • Developers often need to build long strings—e.g., joining lines, logs, or building output—in loops or comprehensions.
  • Naive concatenation in loops is slow and can degrade performance, especially with large datasets.

Solutions

  • Use ''.join(iterable) for concatenating many strings (especially in loops):
words = ['foo', 'bar', 'baz']
result = ''.join(words)
  • For few (2-4) strings, the + operator or f-strings are fine:
# Both are fast for small numbers
a = "hello"
b = "world"
result = a + " " + b
# or
result = f"{a} {b}"
  • For very large or unknown numbers of strings, always collect into a list, then ''.join at the end.
  • If you must build incrementally (e.g., unknown chunks), use io.StringIO:
from io import StringIO
buf = StringIO()
for word in words:
    buf.write(word)
result = buf.getvalue()

Things to Consider

  • Strings are immutable in Python: each + creates a new string and copies data.
  • ''.join(list_of_strings) is fastest for many items; scales linearly.
  • For CPython, f-strings and + are highly optimized, but only with a few items.
  • For Python <3.6, avoid chained + in loops.
  • StringIO is good for thousands of chunks or when you can’t pre-collect strings.

Gotchas

  • Don’t use s = s + new in a loop for many strings—O(n²) time due to repeated copying.
  • Avoid using += for string accumulation in a loop for the same reason.
  • Don’t confuse join with concatenating non-string objects; always convert to str first.

Sources


Further Investigation


TL;DR

  • For best performance, use ''.join(list_of_strings) for many items.
result = ''.join(my_list_of_strings)
  • Don’t use + or += in a loop to concatenate large numbers of strings—it’s slow.