Forcing a list out of a generator - python

>>>def change(x):
... x.append(len(x))
... return x
>>>a=[]
>>>b=(change(a) for i in range(3))
>>>next(b)
[0]
>>>next(b)
[0,1]
>>>next(b)
[0,1,2]
>>>next(b)
Traceback ... StopIteration
>>>a=[]
>>>b=(change(a) for i in range(3))
>>>list(b) #expecting [[0],[0,1],[0,1,2]]
[[0,1,2],[0,1,2],[0,1,2]]
So I was just testing my understanding of generators and messing around with the command prompt and now I'm unsure if I actually understand how generators work.

The problem is that all calls to change(a) return the same object (in this case, the object is the value of a), but this object is mutable and changes its value. An example of the same problem without using generators:
a = []
b = []
for i in range(3):
a.append(len(a))
b.append(a)
print b
If you want to avoid it, you need to make a copy of your object (for example, make change return x[:] instead of x).

Related

How to use python iterators in a pure functional workflow

Something that has been bothering me is that python iterators do not fall into the definition of a pure immutable object as re accessing them modifies their behavior.
I understand the way this works but reading code with iterators can become confusing and doesn't seem very pythonic.
My question is... is there a nice pythonic way to approach this?
I.e. The use of an iterator here results in a side effect(input argument is modified) makes the function impure
def foo(i):
return list(i)
b = iter([1,2,3])
print(foo(b)) # outputs [1,2,3]
print(foo(b)) # outputs []
print(list(b)) # outputs []
Issue in your example is that your iterator a state is in global scope which sort of already clashes with "no side-effects" rule. Once it gets exhausted (eg, it has throw StopIteration exception), its done and has to be reinitialized.
from copy import copy
def foo(i):
return list(i)
a = [1,2,3]
b = iter(a)
print(foo(copy(b))) # outputs [1,2,3]
print(foo(copy(b))) # outputs [1,2,3]
print(list(copy(b))) # outputs [1,2,3]

Function that modifies an argument outside that function without using "return" python [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Why can a function modify some arguments as perceived by the caller, but not others?
(13 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
Let's take a simple code:
y = [1,2,3]
def plusOne(y):
for x in range(len(y)):
y[x] += 1
return y
print plusOne(y), y
a = 2
def plusOne2(a):
a += 1
return a
print plusOne2(a), a
Values of 'y' change but value 'a' stays the same. I have already learned that it's because one is mutable and the other is not. But how to change the code so that the function doesn't change the list?
For example to do something like that (in pseudocode for simplicity):
a = [1,2,3,...,n]
function doSomething(x):
do stuff with x
return x
b = doSomething(a)
if someOperation(a) > someOperation(b):
do stuff
EDIT: Sorry, but I have another question on nested lists. See this code:
def change(y):
yN = y[:]
for i in range(len(yN)):
if yN[i][0] == 1:
yN[i][0] = 0
else:
yN[i][0] = 1
return yN
data1 = [[1],[1],[0],[0]]
data2 = change(data1)
Here it doesn't work. Why? Again: how to avoid this problem? I understand why it is not working: yN = y[:] copies values of y to yN, but the values are also lists, so the operation would have to be doubled for every list in list. How to do this operation with nested lists?
Python variables contain pointers, or references, to objects. All values (even integers) are objects, and assignment changes the variable to point to a different object. It does not store a new value in the variable, it changes the variable to refer or point to a different object. For this reason many people say that Python doesn't have "variables," it has "names," and the = operation doesn't "assign a value to a variable," but rather "binds a name to an object."
In plusOne you are modifying (or "mutating") the contents of y but never change what y itself refers to. It stays pointing to the same list, the one you passed in to the function. The global variable y and the local variable y refer to the same list, so the changes are visible using either variable. Since you changed the contents of the object that was passed in, there is actually no reason to return y (in fact, returning None is what Python itself does for operations like this that modify a list "in place" -- values are returned by operations that create new objects rather than mutating existing ones).
In plusOne2 you are changing the local variable a to refer to a different integer object, 3. ("Binding the name a to the object 3.") The global variable a is not changed by this and continues to point to 2.
If you don't want to change a list passed in, make a copy of it and change that. Then your function should return the new list since it's one of those operations that creates a new object, and the new object will be lost if you don't return it. You can do this as the first line of the function: x = x[:] for example (as others have pointed out). Or, if it might be useful to have the function called either way, you can have the caller pass in x[:] if he wants a copy made.
Create a copy of the list. Using testList = inputList[:]. See the code
>>> def plusOne(y):
newY = y[:]
for x in range(len(newY)):
newY[x] += 1
return newY
>>> y = [1, 2, 3]
>>> print plusOne(y), y
[2, 3, 4] [1, 2, 3]
Or, you can create a new list in the function
>>> def plusOne(y):
newList = []
for elem in y:
newList.append(elem+1)
return newList
You can also use a comprehension as others have pointed out.
>>> def plusOne(y):
return [elem+1 for elem in y]
You can pass a copy of your list, using slice notation:
print plusOne(y[:]), y
Or the better way would be to create the copy of list in the function itself, so that the caller don't have to worry about the possible modification:
def plusOne(y):
y_copy = y[:]
and work on y_copy instead.
Or as pointed out by #abarnet in comments, you can modify the function to use list comprehension, which will create a new list altogether:
return [x + 1 for x in y]
Just create a new list with the values you want in it and return that instead.
def plus_one(sequence):
return [el + 1 for el in sequence]
As others have pointed out, you should use newlist = original[:] or newlist = list(original) to copy the list if you do not want to modify the original.
def plusOne(y):
y2 = list(y) # copy the list over, y2 = y[:] also works
for i, _ in enumerate(y2):
y2[i] += 1
return y2
However, you can acheive your desired output with a list comprehension
def plusOne(y):
return [i+1 for i in y]
This will iterate over the values in y and create a new list by adding one to each of them
To answer your edited question:
Copying nested data structures is called deep copying. To do this in Python, use deepcopy() within the copy module.
You can do that by make a function and call this function by map function ,
map function will call the add function and give it the value after that it will print the new value like that:
def add(x):
return x+x
print(list(map(add,[1,2,3])))
Or you can use (*range) function it is very easy to do that like that example :
print ([i+i for i in [*range (1,10)]])

Python global vs. local variables — numbers and arrays treated differently [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Why can a function modify some arguments as perceived by the caller, but not others?
(13 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
Let's take a simple code:
y = [1,2,3]
def plusOne(y):
for x in range(len(y)):
y[x] += 1
return y
print plusOne(y), y
a = 2
def plusOne2(a):
a += 1
return a
print plusOne2(a), a
Values of 'y' change but value 'a' stays the same. I have already learned that it's because one is mutable and the other is not. But how to change the code so that the function doesn't change the list?
For example to do something like that (in pseudocode for simplicity):
a = [1,2,3,...,n]
function doSomething(x):
do stuff with x
return x
b = doSomething(a)
if someOperation(a) > someOperation(b):
do stuff
EDIT: Sorry, but I have another question on nested lists. See this code:
def change(y):
yN = y[:]
for i in range(len(yN)):
if yN[i][0] == 1:
yN[i][0] = 0
else:
yN[i][0] = 1
return yN
data1 = [[1],[1],[0],[0]]
data2 = change(data1)
Here it doesn't work. Why? Again: how to avoid this problem? I understand why it is not working: yN = y[:] copies values of y to yN, but the values are also lists, so the operation would have to be doubled for every list in list. How to do this operation with nested lists?
Python variables contain pointers, or references, to objects. All values (even integers) are objects, and assignment changes the variable to point to a different object. It does not store a new value in the variable, it changes the variable to refer or point to a different object. For this reason many people say that Python doesn't have "variables," it has "names," and the = operation doesn't "assign a value to a variable," but rather "binds a name to an object."
In plusOne you are modifying (or "mutating") the contents of y but never change what y itself refers to. It stays pointing to the same list, the one you passed in to the function. The global variable y and the local variable y refer to the same list, so the changes are visible using either variable. Since you changed the contents of the object that was passed in, there is actually no reason to return y (in fact, returning None is what Python itself does for operations like this that modify a list "in place" -- values are returned by operations that create new objects rather than mutating existing ones).
In plusOne2 you are changing the local variable a to refer to a different integer object, 3. ("Binding the name a to the object 3.") The global variable a is not changed by this and continues to point to 2.
If you don't want to change a list passed in, make a copy of it and change that. Then your function should return the new list since it's one of those operations that creates a new object, and the new object will be lost if you don't return it. You can do this as the first line of the function: x = x[:] for example (as others have pointed out). Or, if it might be useful to have the function called either way, you can have the caller pass in x[:] if he wants a copy made.
Create a copy of the list. Using testList = inputList[:]. See the code
>>> def plusOne(y):
newY = y[:]
for x in range(len(newY)):
newY[x] += 1
return newY
>>> y = [1, 2, 3]
>>> print plusOne(y), y
[2, 3, 4] [1, 2, 3]
Or, you can create a new list in the function
>>> def plusOne(y):
newList = []
for elem in y:
newList.append(elem+1)
return newList
You can also use a comprehension as others have pointed out.
>>> def plusOne(y):
return [elem+1 for elem in y]
You can pass a copy of your list, using slice notation:
print plusOne(y[:]), y
Or the better way would be to create the copy of list in the function itself, so that the caller don't have to worry about the possible modification:
def plusOne(y):
y_copy = y[:]
and work on y_copy instead.
Or as pointed out by #abarnet in comments, you can modify the function to use list comprehension, which will create a new list altogether:
return [x + 1 for x in y]
Just create a new list with the values you want in it and return that instead.
def plus_one(sequence):
return [el + 1 for el in sequence]
As others have pointed out, you should use newlist = original[:] or newlist = list(original) to copy the list if you do not want to modify the original.
def plusOne(y):
y2 = list(y) # copy the list over, y2 = y[:] also works
for i, _ in enumerate(y2):
y2[i] += 1
return y2
However, you can acheive your desired output with a list comprehension
def plusOne(y):
return [i+1 for i in y]
This will iterate over the values in y and create a new list by adding one to each of them
To answer your edited question:
Copying nested data structures is called deep copying. To do this in Python, use deepcopy() within the copy module.
You can do that by make a function and call this function by map function ,
map function will call the add function and give it the value after that it will print the new value like that:
def add(x):
return x+x
print(list(map(add,[1,2,3])))
Or you can use (*range) function it is very easy to do that like that example :
print ([i+i for i in [*range (1,10)]])

How do Python generator functions maintain local state?

According to the docs at https://docs.python.org/2/reference/simple_stmts.html#yield,
all local state is retained, including the current bindings of local variables, the instruction pointer, and the internal evaluation stack: enough information is saved so that the next time next() is invoked, the function can proceed exactly as if the yield statement were just another external call.
Here's a simple case:
def generator():
my_list = range(10)
print "my_list got assigned"
for i in my_list:
print i
yield
return
In the shell, generator() behaves like this:
>>>>generator().next()
my_list got assigned
0
>>>>generator().next()
my_list got assigned
0
I would have thought that my_list would not get reassigned each time .next() is called. Can someone explain why this happens, and why it seems like the docs contradict this?
You are creating a new generator object each time. Create one instance:
g = generator()
g.next()
g.next()
Here g references the generator object that maintains the state:
>>> def generator():
... my_list = range(10)
... print "my_list got assigned"
... for i in my_list:
... print i
... yield
... return
...
>>> g = generator()
>>> g
<generator object generator at 0x100633f50>
>>> g.next()
my_list got assigned
0
>>> g.next()
1
Yes, the generator maintains state, as you correctly found in the documentation. The problem is that in your example, you're creating two generators. The first one is not assigned to any variable, so it's discarded immediately after .next() completes. Then you create the second generator, with its own local state, that starts at the beginning.
Try this:
>>> mygen = generator()
>>> mygen.next()
my_list got assigned
0
>>> mygen.next()
1
You're creating a new instance of generator when you call generator().
If you instead did
my_generator = generator()
my_generator.next() # my_list got assigned, 0
my_generator.next() # 1
the list would only be assigned once.

Why does my function call affect my variable sent in the parameter?

So as part of /r/dailyprogrammer's challenge on trying out a few simple tasks in a new Programming language, I tried out Python after only having dabbled in it very slightly.
There I had to recreate a Bubble-Sort in Python and this is what I came up with:
def bubble(unsorted):
length = len(unsorted)
isSorted = False
while not isSorted:
isSorted = True
for i in range(0, length-1):
if(unsorted[i] > unsorted[i+1]):
isSorted = False
holder = unsorted[i]
unsorted[i] = unsorted[i+1]
unsorted[i+1] = holder
myList = [5,6,4,2,10,1]
bubble(myList)
print myList
Now this code works flawlessly as far as I can tell, and that is precisely the problem. I can't figure out why bubble function would affect the variable myList without me returning anything to it, or setting it anew.
This is really bugging me but it's probably a python type thing :) That or I'm a very silly man indeed.
I'm not sure what the reason of the confusion is, but if you think that each time when you write func(obj) the whole object is copied to the stack, you're wrong.
All parameters, except primitive types such as numbers, are passed by reference. It means that object's members or array elements can be updated after function is executed.
Write a simple prog to confirm that:
>>> a=[1]
>>> def f(x):
... x[0]=2
...
>>> f(a)
>>> print a[0]
2
I hope it'll clarify the picture.
For primitive types you'll have a different result though:
>>> i=1
>>> def f(x):
... x=2
...
>>> f(i)
>>> print i
1
>>>
The answer is unsorted and myList point to the same object, they are not copies. Hence, when you change one you change the other. You can find a visualization of it here.

Categories

Resources