使用Python set类型。这是最Pythonic的。：）

此外，由于它是原生的，它也应该是最优化的方法。

See:

http://docs.python.org/library/stdtypes.html#set

http://docs.python.org/library/sets.htm(适用于较旧的python)

# Using Python 2.7 set literal format.
# Otherwise, use: l1 = set([1,2,6,8])
#
l1 = {1,2,6,8}
l2 = {2,3,5,8}
l3 = l1 - l2

Python有一个称为列表推导式的语言特性，它非常适合使这类事情变得极其简单。下面的语句完全是你想要的，并将结果存储在l3中:

l3 = [x for x in l1 if x not in l2]

L3将包含[1,6]。

使用Python set类型。这是最Pythonic的。：）

此外，由于它是原生的，它也应该是最优化的方法。

See:

http://docs.python.org/library/stdtypes.html#set

http://docs.python.org/library/sets.htm(适用于较旧的python)

# Using Python 2.7 set literal format.
# Otherwise, use: l1 = set([1,2,6,8])
#
l1 = {1,2,6,8}
l2 = {2,3,5,8}
l3 = l1 - l2

扩展Donut的答案和这里的其他答案，通过使用生成器推导式而不是列表推导式，以及使用集合数据结构(因为in操作符在列表上是O(n)，而在集合上是O(1))，您可以得到更好的结果。

这里有一个函数适合你:

def filter_list(full_list, excludes):
    s = set(excludes)
    return (x for x in full_list if x not in s)

结果将是一个可迭代对象，它将惰性地获取过滤后的列表。如果你需要一个真正的列表对象(例如，如果你需要对结果执行len())，那么你可以很容易地像这样构建一个列表:

filtered_list = list(filter_list(full_list, excludes))

性能比较

在Python 3.9.1和Python 2.7.16上比较这里提到的所有答案的性能。

Python 3.9.1

答案按表现顺序列出:

Arkku's set difference using subtraction "-" operation - (91.3 nsec per loop) mquadri$ python3 -m timeit -s "l1 = set([1,2,6,8]); l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "l1 - l2" 5000000 loops, best of 5: 91.3 nsec per loop Moinuddin Quadri's using set().difference()- (133 nsec per loop) mquadri$ python3 -m timeit -s "l1 = set([1,2,6,8]); l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "l1.difference(l2)" 2000000 loops, best of 5: 133 nsec per loop Moinuddin Quadri's list comprehension with set based lookup- (366 nsec per loop) mquadri$ python3 -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "[x for x in l1 if x not in l2]" 1000000 loops, best of 5: 366 nsec per loop Donut's list comprehension on plain list - (489 nsec per loop) mquadri$ python3 -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = [2,3,5,8];" "[x for x in l1 if x not in l2]" 500000 loops, best of 5: 489 nsec per loop Daniel Pryden's generator expression with set based lookup and type-casting to list - (583 nsec per loop) : Explicitly type-casting to list to get the final object as list, as requested by OP. If generator expression is replaced with list comprehension, it'll become same as Moinuddin Quadri's list comprehension with set based lookup. mquadri$ mquadri$ python3 -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "list(x for x in l1 if x not in l2)" 500000 loops, best of 5: 583 nsec per loop Moinuddin Quadri's using filter() and explicitly type-casting to list (need to explicitly type-cast as in Python 3.x, it returns iterator) - (681 nsec per loop) mquadri$ python3 -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "list(filter(lambda x: x not in l2, l1))" 500000 loops, best of 5: 681 nsec per loop Akshay Hazari's using combination of functools.reduce + filter -(3.36 usec per loop) : Explicitly type-casting to list as from Python 3.x it started returned returning iterator. Also we need to import functools to use reduce in Python 3.x mquadri$ python3 -m timeit "from functools import reduce; l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = [2,3,5,8];" "list(reduce(lambda x,y : filter(lambda z: z!=y,x) ,l1,l2))" 100000 loops, best of 5: 3.36 usec per loop

Python 2.7.16

答案按表现顺序列出:

Arkku's set difference using subtraction "-" operation - (0.0783 usec per loop) mquadri$ python -m timeit -s "l1 = set([1,2,6,8]); l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "l1 - l2" 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.0783 usec per loop Moinuddin Quadri's using set().difference()- (0.117 usec per loop) mquadri$ mquadri$ python -m timeit -s "l1 = set([1,2,6,8]); l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "l1.difference(l2)" 10000000 loops, best of 3: 0.117 usec per loop Moinuddin Quadri's list comprehension with set based lookup- (0.246 usec per loop) mquadri$ python -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "[x for x in l1 if x not in l2]" 1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.246 usec per loop Donut's list comprehension on plain list - (0.372 usec per loop) mquadri$ python -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = [2,3,5,8];" "[x for x in l1 if x not in l2]" 1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.372 usec per loop Moinuddin Quadri's using filter() - (0.593 usec per loop) mquadri$ python -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "filter(lambda x: x not in l2, l1)" 1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.593 usec per loop Daniel Pryden's generator expression with set based lookup and type-casting to list - (0.964 per loop) : Explicitly type-casting to list to get the final object as list, as requested by OP. If generator expression is replaced with list comprehension, it'll become same as Moinuddin Quadri's list comprehension with set based lookup. mquadri$ python -m timeit -s "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = set([2,3,5,8]);" "list(x for x in l1 if x not in l2)" 1000000 loops, best of 3: 0.964 usec per loop Akshay Hazari's using combination of functools.reduce + filter -(2.78 usec per loop) mquadri$ python -m timeit "l1 = [1,2,6,8]; l2 = [2,3,5,8];" "reduce(lambda x,y : filter(lambda z: z!=y,x) ,l1,l2)" 100000 loops, best of 3: 2.78 usec per loop

通过利用字典的有序属性来维持顺序(Python 3.7+)

注意:Python 3.6中字典的参考实现按照插入顺序维护键，但规范不保证这一点。对于3.7及更高版本，添加了这个保证。

字典的键作为一种集合;重复项被隐式过滤掉，由于散列，查找是高效的。因此，我们可以通过使用l1作为键来构建字典，然后删除出现在l2中的任何键来实现“set difference”。这维持了秩序并使用了一种快速的算法，但会产生相当数量的常量开销。

d = dict.fromkeys(l1)
for i in l2:
    try:
        del d[i]
    except KeyError:
        pass
l3 = list(d.keys())