Develop Reference

Why python call by reference is so unruly

arr = [1]
def f1(lst):
lst.append(2)
print(lst)
lst = 2
print(lst)
f1(arr)
print(arr) # [1,2]
why python call by reference parameter does not change to value?
what does lst variable indeicating when do "lst = 2"
(not connected to arr?)

Assigning lst = 2 doesn't affect the value of arr. In fact, python doesn't do "call by reference" at all.

Annotating your code with comments that might help clear it up:
arr = [1]
def f1(lst):
# lst and arr both refer to the same [1] list at this point.
# Two different and independent names for the same object.
lst.append(2) # appends 2 to [1], aka lst, aka arr
print(lst) # lst/arr is now [1, 2]
lst = 2 # reassign the name 'lst' to the value 2!
# At this point, lst refers to 2 instead of [1, 2].
# lst and arr are no longer connected.
# arr is still [1, 2] even though lst is 2.
print(lst) # indeed, lst is now 2
# but arr is still [1, 2], as seen below:
f1(arr)
print(arr) # [1,2]
https://nedbatchelder.com/text/names.html is highly recommended reading on this topic! The main thing to understand is that lst and arr are just different names that at different points in the code might refer to the same value or different values.
When you call lst.append, you are modifying the value that lst is a name for, which arr also happens to be a name for. When you say lst = 2, you are rebinding the name lst, but you are not modifying the value that it previously referred to (and to which arr still refers).

Changing the passed-in list within a function [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Passing values in Python [duplicate]
(8 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
Consider the Python code below:
def change_list(in_list):
in_list = [1,2,3]
def change_list_append(in_list):
in_list.append(7)
my_list = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
change_list(my_list)
print(my_list)
change_list_append(my_list)
print(my_list)
The output is:
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7]
I don't understand why the first call (change_list) did not result in my_list to become [1,2,3]. Can someone explain? Look at what happens with the call to change_list_append: number 7 is appended to my_list.

Assigning to a name never changes the value previously referenced by the list. This is true even without invoking function parameters.
>>> x = [1,2,3]
>>> y = x
>>> y = [4,5,6]
>>> x
[1, 2, 3]
Changing what y refers to does not alter what x refers to.
In your second example, you are invoking a mutating method on the list referenced by the parameter. Both my_list and in_list refer to the same list, so it any changes made to the list via either reference are visible from either reference.
See https://nedbatchelder.com/text/names.html for a more in-depth discussion of how references work in Python.

I think this post sums it up nicely => Why can a function modify some arguments as perceived by the caller, but not others?
You can assign items to the in_list using methods (like the .clear() method or the .assign() ) not rename.

As mentioned by others, the 1st function does not modify the global my_list. Instead it modifies the local variable
If you want change_list to modify the global variable you need to the function to return the new value and assign it to my_list.
Something like this will do:
def change_list():
newList = [1,2,3]
return newList
def change_list_append(in_list):
in_list.append(7)
my_list = [1,2,3,4,5,6]
my_list = change_list()
print(my_list)
change_list_append(my_list)
print(my_list)
Output:
[1, 2, 3]
[1, 2, 3, 7]

Function which removes the first item in a list (Python)

I am trying to write a function which removes the first item in a Python list. This is what I've tried. Why doesn't remove_first_wrong change l when I call the function on it? And why does the list slicing approach work when I do it in the main function?
def remove_first_wrong(lst):
lst = lst[1:]
def remove_first_right(lst):
lst.pop(0)
if __name__ == '__main__':
l = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
remove_first_wrong(l)
print(l)
l_2 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
remove_first_right(l_2)
print(l_2)
# Why does this work and remove_first_wrong doesn't?
l_3 = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
l_3 = l_3[1:]
print(l_3)

Slicing a list returns a new list object, which is a copy of the original list indices you indicated in the slice. You then rebound lst (a local name in the function) to reference that new list instead. The old list is never altered in that process.
list.pop() on the other hand, operates on the list object itself. It doesn't matter what reference you used to reach the list.
You'd see the same thing without functions:
>>> a = [1, 2]
>>> b = a[:] # slice with all the elements, produces a *copy*
>>> b
[1, 2]
>>> a.pop() # remove an element from a won't change b
2
>>> b
[1, 2]
>>> a
[1]
Using [:] is one of two ways of making a shallow copy of a list, see How to clone or copy a list?
You may want to read or watch Ned Batchelder's Names and Values presestation, to further help understand how Python names and objects work.

Inside the function remove_first_wrong the = sign reassigns the name lst to the object on the right. Which is a brand new object, created by slicing operation lst[1:]. Thus, the object lst assigned to is local to that function (and it actually will disappear on return).
That is what Martijn means by "You then rebound lst (a local name in the function) to reference that new list instead."
On contrary, lst.pop(0) is a call to the given object -- it operates on the object.
For example, this will work right too:
def remove_first_right2(lst):
x = lst # x is assigned to the same object as lst
x.pop(0) # pop the item from the object

Alternately, you can use del keyword:
def remove_first_element(lst):
del lst[0]
return lst

Writing Python code that works like the reverse() function

I'm looking to break down the reverse() function and write it out in code for practice. I eventually figured out how to do it (step thru the original list backwards and append to the new 'reversed' list) but wondering why this doesn't work.
def reverse(list):
newlist = []
index = 0
while index < len(list):
newlist[index] = list[(len(list)) - 1 - index]
index = index + 1
return newlist
list = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
print(reverse(list))

In Python, you cannot access/update an element of a list, if the index is not in the range of 0 and length of the list - 1.
In your case, you are trying to assign to element at 0, but the list is empty. So, it doesn't have index 0. That is why it fails with the error,
IndexError: list assignment index out of range
Instead, you can use append function, like this
newlist.append(list[(len(list)) - 1 - index])
Apart from that, you can use range function to count backwards like this
for index in range(len(list) - 1, -1, -1):
newlist.append(list[index])
you don't even have to increment the index yourself, for loop takes care of it.
As suggested by #abarnert, you can actually iterate the list and add the elements at the beginning every time, like this
>>> def reverse(mylist):
... result = []
... for item in mylist:
... result.insert(0, item)
... return result
...
>>> reverse([1, 2, 3, 4, 5])
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
If you want to create a new reversed list, you may not have to write a function on your own, instead you can use the slicing notation to create a new reversed list, like this
>>> mylist = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>>> mylist[::-1]
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
but this doesn't change the original object.
>>> mylist = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>>> mylist[::-1]
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
>>> mylist
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
if you want to change the original object, just assign the slice back to the slice of the original object, like this
>>> mylist
[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
>>> mylist[:] = mylist[::-1]
>>> mylist
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
Note: reversed actually returns a reverse iterator object, not a list. So, it doesn't build the entire list reversed. Instead it returns elements one by one when iterated with next protocol.
>>> reversed([1, 2, 3, 4, 5])
<list_reverseiterator object at 0x7fdc118ba978>
>>> for item in reversed([1, 2, 3, 4, 5]):
... print(item)
...
...
5
4
3
2
1
So, you might want to make it a generator function, like this
>>> def reverse(mylist):
... for index in range(len(mylist) - 1, -1, -1):
... yield mylist[index]
...
...
>>> reverse([1, 2, 3, 4, 5])
<generator object reverse at 0x7fdc118f99d8>
So the reverse function returns a generator object. If you want a list, then you can create one with list function, like this
>>> list(reverse([1, 2, 3, 4, 5]))
[5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
if you are just going to process it one by one, then iterate it with a for loop, like this
>>> for i in reverse([1, 2, 3, 4, 5]):
... print(i)
...
...
5
4
3
2
1

First off don't override build-ins (list in your case) second newlist has a len of 0 therefore cannot be accessed by index.
def reverse(mylist):
newlist = [0] * len(mylist)
index = 0
while index < len(mylist):
newlist[index] = mylist[(len(mylist)) - 1 - index]
index = index + 1
return newlist
mylist = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
print(reverse(mylist))
you can create a list with values of the same lenght as your input list like so
newlist = [0] * len(mylist)

You need to use list.append. newlist[0] is a valid operation, if the list has atleast one element in it, but newlist is empty in this very first iteration. Also, list is not a good name for a variable, as there is a python builtin container with the same name:
def reverse(lst):
newlist = []
index = 0
while index < len(lst):
newlist.append(lst[(len(list)) - 1 - index])
index += 1
return newlist
list = [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
print(reverse(list))

You can't assign to an arbitrary index for a 0-length list. Doing so raises an IndexError. Since you're assigning the elements in order, you can just do an append instead of an assignment to an index:
newlist.append(l[(len(l)) - 1 - index])
Append modifies the list and increases its length automatically.
Another way to get your original code to work would be to change the initialization of newlist so that it has sufficient length to support your index operations:
newlist = [None for _ in range(len(l))]
I would also like to note that it's not a good idea to name things after built-in types and functions. Doing so shadows the functionality of the built-ins.

To write the function you're trying to write, see thefourtheye's answer.
But that isn't how reverse works, or what it does. Instead of creating a new list, it modifies the existing list in-place.
If you think about it, that's pretty easy: just go through half the indices, for each index N, swap the Nth from the left and the Nth from the right.*
So, sticking with your existing framework:
def reverse(lst):
index = 0
while index < len(lst)/2:
lst[index], lst[len(lst) - 1 - index] = lst[len(lst) - 1 - index], lst[index]
index = index + 1
As a side note, using while loops like this is almost always a bad idea. If you want to loop over a range of numbers, just use for index in range(len(lst)):. Besides reducing three lines of code to one and making it more obvious what you're doing, it removes multiple places where you could make a simple but painful-to-debug mistake.
Also, note that in most cases, in Python, it's easier to use a negative index to mean "from the right edge" than to do the math yourself, and again it will usually remove a possible place you could easily make a painful mistake. But in this particular case, it might not actually be any less error-prone…
* You do have to make sure you think through the edge cases. It doesn't matter whether for odd lists you swap the middle element with itself or not, but just make sure you don't round the wrong way and go one element too far or too short. Which is a great opportunity to learn about how to write good unit tests…

probably check this out:
def reverse(lst):
newList = []
countList = len(lst) - 1
for x in range(countList,-1,-1):
newList.append(lst[x])
return newList
def main():
lst = [9,8,7,6,5,4,2]
print(reverse(lst))
main()

reverse method mutating input

For an assignment we were asked to create a function that would reverse all the elements in an arbitrarily nested list. So inputs to the function should return something like this:
>>> seq = [1,[2,[3]]]
>>> print arb_reverse(seq)
[[[3],2],1]
>>> seq = [9,[[],[0,1,[[],[2,[[],3]]]],[],[[[4],5]]]]
>>> print arb_reverse(seq)
[[[[5,[4]]],[],[[[[3,[]],2],[]],1,0],[]],9]
I came up with a recursive solution which works well:
def arb_reverse(seq):
result = []
for element in reversed(seq):
if not is_list(element):
result.append(element)
else:
result.append(arb_reverse(element))
return result
But for a bit of a personal challenge I wanted to create a solution without the use of recursion. One version of this attempt resulted in some curious behavior which I am not understanding. For clarification, I was NOT expecting this version to work properly but the resulting input mutation does not make sense. Here is the iterative version in question:
def arb_reverse(seq):
elements = list(seq) #so input is not mutated, also tried seq[:] just to be thorough
result = []
while elements:
item = elements.pop()
if isinstance(item, list):
item.reverse() #this operation seems to be the culprit
elements += item
else:
result.append(item)
return result
This returns a flattened semi-reversed list (somewhat expected), but the interesting part is what it does to the input (not expected)...
>>> a = [1, [2, [3]]]
>>> arb_reverse(a)
[2, 3, 1]
>>> a
[1, [[3], 2]]
>>> p = [1, [2, 3, [4, [5, 6]]]]
>>> print arb_reverse(p)
[2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 1]
>>> print p
[1, [[[6, 5], 4], 3, 2]]
I was under the impression that by passing the values contained in the input to a variable using list() or input[:] as i did with elements, that I would avoid mutating the input. However, a few print statements later revealed that the reverse method had a hand in mutating the original list. Why is that?

The list() call is making a new list with shallow-copied lists from the original.
Try this (stolen from here):
from copy import deepcopy
listB = deepcopy(listA)

Try running the following code through this tool http://people.csail.mit.edu/pgbovine/python/tutor.html
o1 = [1, 2, 3]
o2 = [4, 5, 6]
l1 = [o1, o2]
l2 = list(l1)
l2[0].reverse()
print l2
print l1
Specifically look at what happens when l2[0].reverse() is called.
You'll see that when you call list() to create a copy of the list, the lists still reference the same objects.