Related
I am trying to create a function that takes in a dictionary and returns a reverse of it while taking care of repeated values. That is, if the original dictionary would be
original_dict = {'first': ['a'], 'second': ['b', 'c'], 'third': ['d'], 'fourth': ['d']}
the function should return
{'a': ['first'], 'b': ['second'], 'c': ['second'], 'd': ['third', 'fourth']}
I've written
def reversed_dict(d):
new_dict = {}
for keys,values in d.items():
new_dict[values]=keys
but when I try it out with the original dictionary, I get an error "unhashable type: 'list'" when I try out the function. Are there any hints what might be causing it?
You have to iterate over the values in the list as well:
def reversed_dict(d):
new_dict = {}
for keys,values in d.items():
for val in values:
new_dict.setdefault(val, []).append(keys)
return new_dict
You have to iterate over the values and add them as keys. You also have to take into account the possibility that you may have already added a value as a key.
def reversed_dict(d):
new_dict = {}
for keys,values in d.items():
for v in values:
if v in new_dict:
new_dict[v].append(keys)
else:
new_dict[v] = [keys]
return new_dict
Use collections.defaultdict:
from collections import defaultdict
def reversed_dict(d):
new_dict = defaultdict(list)
for key, values in d.items():
for value in values:
new_dict[value].append(key)
return new_dict
The problem with your approach is you're using the entire list as the key of the dictionary. Instead you need to iterate over the list (i.e. for value in values: in the code above.)
defaultdict just makes it simpler to read.
You are getting this error because any of your original_dict values is a mutable type which is, as the error suggests, an unhashable type thus not
avalid candidate for a key in the reversed_dict.
You can workaround this problem by type-checking and casting mutable types into an immutable equivalent, e.g. a list into a tuple.
(also I find dict comp a way more elegant and concise approach):
def reversed_dict(d):
return {v if not isinstance(v, list) else tuple(v): k for k, v in d.items()}
Using dictionary comprehension is it possible to convert all values recursively to string?
I have this dictionary
d = {
"root": {
"a": "1",
"b": 2,
"c": 3,
"d": 4
}
}
I tried
{k: str(v) for k, v in d.items()}
But the code above turns the entire root value into string and I want this:
d = {"root": {"a": "1", "b": "2", "c": "3", "d": "4"}}
This is not a dictionary comprehension, but it works, it's just one line, and it's recursive!
(f := lambda d: {k: f(v) for k, v in d.items()} if type(d) == dict else str(d))(d)
It only works with Python 3.8+ though (because of the use of an assignment expression).
You could do a recursive solution for arbitrarily nested dicts, but if you only have 2 levels the following is sufficient:
{k: {k2: str(v2) for k2, v2 in v.items()} for k, v in d.items()}
Assuming that your given input was wrong and root's value was a dictionary, your code would somewhat work. You just need to add d['root'].items()
newDict = {k:{k: str(v) for k, v in d[k].items()} for k,v in d.items()}
output
{'root': {'a': '1', 'b': '2', 'c': '3', 'd': '4'}}
The following solution might not be using dictionary comprehension, but it is recursive and can transform dictionaries of any depth, I don't think that's possible using comprehension alone:
def convert_to_string(d):
for key, value in d.items():
if isinstance(value, dict):
convert_to_string(value)
else:
d[key] = str(value)
Found a simpler way to to achieve this using json module. Just made the following
import json
string_json = json.dumps(d) # Convert to json string
d = json.loads(string_json, parse_int=str) # This convert the `int` to `str` recursively.
Using a function
def dictionary_string(dictionary: dict) -> dict:
return json.loads(json.dumps(dictionary), parse_int=str, parse_float=str)
Regards
Given a dictionary { k1: v1, k2: v2 ... } I want to get { k1: f(v1), k2: f(v2) ... } provided I pass a function f.
Is there any such built in function? Or do I have to do
dict([(k, f(v)) for (k, v) in my_dictionary.iteritems()])
Ideally I would just write
my_dictionary.map_values(f)
or
my_dictionary.mutate_values_with(f)
That is, it doesn't matter to me if the original dictionary is mutated or a copy is created.
There is no such function; the easiest way to do this is to use a dict comprehension:
my_dictionary = {k: f(v) for k, v in my_dictionary.items()}
In python 2.7, use the .iteritems() method instead of .items() to save memory. The dict comprehension syntax wasn't introduced until python 2.7.
Note that there is no such method on lists either; you'd have to use a list comprehension or the map() function.
As such, you could use the map() function for processing your dict as well:
my_dictionary = dict(map(lambda kv: (kv[0], f(kv[1])), my_dictionary.iteritems()))
but that's not that readable, really.
These toolz are great for this kind of simple yet repetitive logic.
http://toolz.readthedocs.org/en/latest/api.html#toolz.dicttoolz.valmap
Gets you right where you want to be.
import toolz
def f(x):
return x+1
toolz.valmap(f, my_list)
Due to PEP-0469 which renamed iteritems() to items() and PEP-3113 which removed Tuple parameter unpacking, in Python 3.x you should write Martijn Pieters♦ answer like this:
my_dictionary = dict(map(lambda item: (item[0], f(item[1])), my_dictionary.items()))
You can do this in-place, rather than create a new dict, which may be preferable for large dictionaries (if you do not need a copy).
def mutate_dict(f,d):
for k, v in d.iteritems():
d[k] = f(v)
my_dictionary = {'a':1, 'b':2}
mutate_dict(lambda x: x+1, my_dictionary)
results in my_dictionary containing:
{'a': 2, 'b': 3}
While my original answer missed the point (by trying to solve this problem with the solution to Accessing key in factory of defaultdict), I have reworked it to propose an actual solution to the present question.
Here it is:
class walkableDict(dict):
def walk(self, callback):
try:
for key in self:
self[key] = callback(self[key])
except TypeError:
return False
return True
Usage:
>>> d = walkableDict({ k1: v1, k2: v2 ... })
>>> d.walk(f)
The idea is to subclass the original dict to give it the desired functionality: "mapping" a function over all the values.
The plus point is that this dictionary can be used to store the original data as if it was a dict, while transforming any data on request with a callback.
Of course, feel free to name the class and the function the way you want (the name chosen in this answer is inspired by PHP's array_walk() function).
Note: Neither the try-except block nor the return statements are mandatory for the functionality, they are there to further mimic the behavior of the PHP's array_walk.
To avoid doing indexing from inside lambda, like:
rval = dict(map(lambda kv : (kv[0], ' '.join(kv[1])), rval.iteritems()))
You can also do:
rval = dict(map(lambda(k,v) : (k, ' '.join(v)), rval.iteritems()))
Just came accross this use case. I implemented gens's answer, adding a recursive approach for handling values that are also dicts:
def mutate_dict_in_place(f, d):
for k, v in d.iteritems():
if isinstance(v, dict):
mutate_dict_in_place(f, v)
else:
d[k] = f(v)
# Exemple handy usage
def utf8_everywhere(d):
mutate_dict_in_place((
lambda value:
value.decode('utf-8')
if isinstance(value, bytes)
else value
),
d
)
my_dict = {'a': b'byte1', 'b': {'c': b'byte2', 'd': b'byte3'}}
utf8_everywhere(my_dict)
print(my_dict)
This can be useful when dealing with json or yaml files that encode strings as bytes in Python 2
My way to map over dictionary
def f(x): return x+2
bill = {"Alice": 20, "Bob": 10}
d = {map(lambda x: f(x),bill.values())}
print('d: ',dict(d))
Results
: d: {22: 12}
Map over iterable in values within dictionary
bills = {"Alice": [20, 15, 30], "Bob": [10, 35]}
d= {map(lambda v: sum(v),bills.values())}
g= dict(map(lambda v: (v[0],sum(v[1])),bills.items()))
# prints
print('d: ',dict(d))
print('g: ',g)
Results
d: {65: 45}
g: {'Alice': 65, 'Bob': 45}
Given a dictionary like so:
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
How can one invert this map to get:
inv_map = {1: 'a', 2: 'b'}
Python 3+:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.items()}
Python 2:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.iteritems()}
Assuming that the values in the dict are unique:
Python 3:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.items())
Python 2:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.iteritems())
If the values in my_map aren't unique:
Python 3:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
Python 2:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.iteritems():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
To do this while preserving the type of your mapping (assuming that it is a dict or a dict subclass):
def inverse_mapping(f):
return f.__class__(map(reversed, f.items()))
Try this:
inv_map = dict(zip(my_map.values(), my_map.keys()))
(Note that the Python docs on dictionary views explicitly guarantee that .keys() and .values() have their elements in the same order, which allows the approach above to work.)
Alternatively:
inv_map = dict((my_map[k], k) for k in my_map)
or using python 3.0's dict comprehensions
inv_map = {my_map[k] : k for k in my_map}
Another, more functional, way:
my_map = { 'a': 1, 'b':2 }
dict(map(reversed, my_map.items()))
We can also reverse a dictionary with duplicate keys using defaultdict:
from collections import Counter, defaultdict
def invert_dict(d):
d_inv = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in d.items():
d_inv[v].append(k)
return d_inv
text = 'aaa bbb ccc ddd aaa bbb ccc aaa'
c = Counter(text.split()) # Counter({'aaa': 3, 'bbb': 2, 'ccc': 2, 'ddd': 1})
dict(invert_dict(c)) # {1: ['ddd'], 2: ['bbb', 'ccc'], 3: ['aaa']}
See here:
This technique is simpler and faster than an equivalent technique using dict.setdefault().
This expands upon the answer by Robert, applying to when the values in the dict aren't unique.
class ReversibleDict(dict):
# Ref: https://stackoverflow.com/a/13057382/
def reversed(self):
"""
Return a reversed dict, with common values in the original dict
grouped into a list in the returned dict.
Example:
>>> d = ReversibleDict({'a': 3, 'c': 2, 'b': 2, 'e': 3, 'd': 1, 'f': 2})
>>> d.reversed()
{1: ['d'], 2: ['c', 'b', 'f'], 3: ['a', 'e']}
"""
revdict = {}
for k, v in self.items():
revdict.setdefault(v, []).append(k)
return revdict
The implementation is limited in that you cannot use reversed twice and get the original back. It is not symmetric as such. It is tested with Python 2.6. Here is a use case of how I am using to print the resultant dict.
If you'd rather use a set than a list, and there could exist unordered applications for which this makes sense, instead of setdefault(v, []).append(k), use setdefault(v, set()).add(k).
Combination of list and dictionary comprehension. Can handle duplicate keys
{v:[i for i in d.keys() if d[i] == v ] for k,v in d.items()}
A case where the dictionary values is a set. Like:
some_dict = {"1":{"a","b","c"},
"2":{"d","e","f"},
"3":{"g","h","i"}}
The inverse would like:
some_dict = {vi: k for k, v in some_dict.items() for vi in v}
The output is like this:
{'c': '1',
'b': '1',
'a': '1',
'f': '2',
'd': '2',
'e': '2',
'g': '3',
'h': '3',
'i': '3'}
For instance, you have the following dictionary:
my_dict = {'a': 'fire', 'b': 'ice', 'c': 'fire', 'd': 'water'}
And you wanna get it in such an inverted form:
inverted_dict = {'fire': ['a', 'c'], 'ice': ['b'], 'water': ['d']}
First Solution. For inverting key-value pairs in your dictionary use a for-loop approach:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have non-unique values
inverted_dict = dict()
for key, value in my_dict.items():
inverted_dict.setdefault(value, list()).append(key)
Second Solution. Use a dictionary comprehension approach for inversion:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have unique values
inverted_dict = {value: key for key, value in my_dict.items()}
Third Solution. Use reverting the inversion approach (relies on the second solution):
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have lists of values
my_dict = {value: key for key in inverted_dict for value in my_map[key]}
Lot of answers but didn't find anything clean in case we are talking about a dictionary with non-unique values.
A solution would be:
from collections import defaultdict
inv_map = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v].append(k)
Example:
If initial dict my_map = {'c': 1, 'd': 5, 'a': 5, 'b': 10}
then, running the code above will give:
{5: ['a', 'd'], 1: ['c'], 10: ['b']}
I found that this version is more than 10% faster than the accepted version of a dictionary with 10000 keys.
d = {i: str(i) for i in range(10000)}
new_d = dict(zip(d.values(), d.keys()))
In addition to the other functions suggested above, if you like lambdas:
invert = lambda mydict: {v:k for k, v in mydict.items()}
Or, you could do it this way too:
invert = lambda mydict: dict( zip(mydict.values(), mydict.keys()) )
I think the best way to do this is to define a class. Here is an implementation of a "symmetric dictionary":
class SymDict:
def __init__(self):
self.aToB = {}
self.bToA = {}
def assocAB(self, a, b):
# Stores and returns a tuple (a,b) of overwritten bindings
currB = None
if a in self.aToB: currB = self.bToA[a]
currA = None
if b in self.bToA: currA = self.aToB[b]
self.aToB[a] = b
self.bToA[b] = a
return (currA, currB)
def lookupA(self, a):
if a in self.aToB:
return self.aToB[a]
return None
def lookupB(self, b):
if b in self.bToA:
return self.bToA[b]
return None
Deletion and iteration methods are easy enough to implement if they're needed.
This implementation is way more efficient than inverting an entire dictionary (which seems to be the most popular solution on this page). Not to mention, you can add or remove values from your SymDict as much as you want, and your inverse-dictionary will always stay valid -- this isn't true if you simply reverse the entire dictionary once.
If the values aren't unique, and you're a little hardcore:
inv_map = dict(
(v, [k for (k, xx) in filter(lambda (key, value): value == v, my_map.items())])
for v in set(my_map.values())
)
Especially for a large dict, note that this solution is far less efficient than the answer Python reverse / invert a mapping because it loops over items() multiple times.
This handles non-unique values and retains much of the look of the unique case.
inv_map = {v:[k for k in my_map if my_map[k] == v] for v in my_map.itervalues()}
For Python 3.x, replace itervalues with values.
I am aware that this question already has many good answers, but I wanted to share this very neat solution that also takes care of duplicate values:
def dict_reverser(d):
seen = set()
return {v: k for k, v in d.items() if v not in seen or seen.add(v)}
This relies on the fact that set.add always returns None in Python.
Here is another way to do it.
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
inv_map= {}
for key in my_map.keys() :
val = my_map[key]
inv_map[val] = key
dict([(value, key) for key, value in d.items()])
Function is symmetric for values of type list; Tuples are coverted to lists when performing reverse_dict(reverse_dict(dictionary))
def reverse_dict(dictionary):
reverse_dict = {}
for key, value in dictionary.iteritems():
if not isinstance(value, (list, tuple)):
value = [value]
for val in value:
reverse_dict[val] = reverse_dict.get(val, [])
reverse_dict[val].append(key)
for key, value in reverse_dict.iteritems():
if len(value) == 1:
reverse_dict[key] = value[0]
return reverse_dict
Since dictionaries require one unique key within the dictionary unlike values, we have to append the reversed values into a list of sort to be included within the new specific keys.
def r_maping(dictionary):
List_z=[]
Map= {}
for z, x in dictionary.iteritems(): #iterate through the keys and values
Map.setdefault(x,List_z).append(z) #Setdefault is the same as dict[key]=default."The method returns the key value available in the dictionary and if given key is not available then it will return provided default value. Afterward, we will append into the default list our new values for the specific key.
return Map
Fast functional solution for non-bijective maps (values not unique):
from itertools import imap, groupby
def fst(s):
return s[0]
def snd(s):
return s[1]
def inverseDict(d):
"""
input d: a -> b
output : b -> set(a)
"""
return {
v : set(imap(fst, kv_iter))
for (v, kv_iter) in groupby(
sorted(d.iteritems(),
key=snd),
key=snd
)
}
In theory this should be faster than adding to the set (or appending to the list) one by one like in the imperative solution.
Unfortunately the values have to be sortable, the sorting is required by groupby.
Try this for python 2.7/3.x
inv_map={};
for i in my_map:
inv_map[my_map[i]]=i
print inv_map
def invertDictionary(d):
myDict = {}
for i in d:
value = d.get(i)
myDict.setdefault(value,[]).append(i)
return myDict
print invertDictionary({'a':1, 'b':2, 'c':3 , 'd' : 1})
This will provide output as : {1: ['a', 'd'], 2: ['b'], 3: ['c']}
A lambda solution for current python 3.x versions:
d1 = dict(alice='apples', bob='bananas')
d2 = dict(map(lambda key: (d1[key], key), d1.keys()))
print(d2)
Result:
{'apples': 'alice', 'bananas': 'bob'}
This solution does not check for duplicates.
Some remarks:
The lambda construct can access d1 from the outer scope, so we only
pass in the current key. It returns a tuple.
The dict() constructor accepts a list of tuples. It
also accepts the result of a map, so we can skip the conversion to a
list.
This solution has no explicit for loop. It also avoids using a list comprehension for those who are bad at math ;-)
Taking up the highly voted answer starting If the values in my_map aren't unique:, I had a problem where not only the values were not unique, but in addition, they were a list, with each item in the list consisting again of a list of three elements: a string value, a number, and another number.
Example:
mymap['key1'] gives you:
[('xyz', 1, 2),
('abc', 5, 4)]
I wanted to switch only the string value with the key, keeping the two number elements at the same place. You simply need another nested for loop then:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
for x in v:
# with x[1:3] same as x[1], x[2]:
inv_map[x[0]] = inv_map.get(x[0], []) + [k, x[1:3]]
Example:
inv_map['abc'] now gives you:
[('key1', 1, 2),
('key1', 5, 4)]
This works even if you have non-unique values in the original dictionary.
def dict_invert(d):
'''
d: dict
Returns an inverted dictionary
'''
# Your code here
inv_d = {}
for k, v in d.items():
if v not in inv_d.keys():
inv_d[v] = [k]
else:
inv_d[v].append(k)
inv_d[v].sort()
print(f"{inv_d[v]} are the values")
return inv_d
I would do it that way in python 2.
inv_map = {my_map[x] : x for x in my_map}
Not something completely different, just a bit rewritten recipe from Cookbook. It's futhermore optimized by retaining setdefault method, instead of each time getting it through the instance:
def inverse(mapping):
'''
A function to inverse mapping, collecting keys with simillar values
in list. Careful to retain original type and to be fast.
>> d = dict(a=1, b=2, c=1, d=3, e=2, f=1, g=5, h=2)
>> inverse(d)
{1: ['f', 'c', 'a'], 2: ['h', 'b', 'e'], 3: ['d'], 5: ['g']}
'''
res = {}
setdef = res.setdefault
for key, value in mapping.items():
setdef(value, []).append(key)
return res if mapping.__class__==dict else mapping.__class__(res)
Designed to be run under CPython 3.x, for 2.x replace mapping.items() with mapping.iteritems()
On my machine runs a bit faster, than other examples here
Given a dictionary like so:
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
How can one invert this map to get:
inv_map = {1: 'a', 2: 'b'}
Python 3+:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.items()}
Python 2:
inv_map = {v: k for k, v in my_map.iteritems()}
Assuming that the values in the dict are unique:
Python 3:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.items())
Python 2:
dict((v, k) for k, v in my_map.iteritems())
If the values in my_map aren't unique:
Python 3:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
Python 2:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.iteritems():
inv_map[v] = inv_map.get(v, []) + [k]
To do this while preserving the type of your mapping (assuming that it is a dict or a dict subclass):
def inverse_mapping(f):
return f.__class__(map(reversed, f.items()))
Try this:
inv_map = dict(zip(my_map.values(), my_map.keys()))
(Note that the Python docs on dictionary views explicitly guarantee that .keys() and .values() have their elements in the same order, which allows the approach above to work.)
Alternatively:
inv_map = dict((my_map[k], k) for k in my_map)
or using python 3.0's dict comprehensions
inv_map = {my_map[k] : k for k in my_map}
Another, more functional, way:
my_map = { 'a': 1, 'b':2 }
dict(map(reversed, my_map.items()))
We can also reverse a dictionary with duplicate keys using defaultdict:
from collections import Counter, defaultdict
def invert_dict(d):
d_inv = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in d.items():
d_inv[v].append(k)
return d_inv
text = 'aaa bbb ccc ddd aaa bbb ccc aaa'
c = Counter(text.split()) # Counter({'aaa': 3, 'bbb': 2, 'ccc': 2, 'ddd': 1})
dict(invert_dict(c)) # {1: ['ddd'], 2: ['bbb', 'ccc'], 3: ['aaa']}
See here:
This technique is simpler and faster than an equivalent technique using dict.setdefault().
This expands upon the answer by Robert, applying to when the values in the dict aren't unique.
class ReversibleDict(dict):
# Ref: https://stackoverflow.com/a/13057382/
def reversed(self):
"""
Return a reversed dict, with common values in the original dict
grouped into a list in the returned dict.
Example:
>>> d = ReversibleDict({'a': 3, 'c': 2, 'b': 2, 'e': 3, 'd': 1, 'f': 2})
>>> d.reversed()
{1: ['d'], 2: ['c', 'b', 'f'], 3: ['a', 'e']}
"""
revdict = {}
for k, v in self.items():
revdict.setdefault(v, []).append(k)
return revdict
The implementation is limited in that you cannot use reversed twice and get the original back. It is not symmetric as such. It is tested with Python 2.6. Here is a use case of how I am using to print the resultant dict.
If you'd rather use a set than a list, and there could exist unordered applications for which this makes sense, instead of setdefault(v, []).append(k), use setdefault(v, set()).add(k).
Combination of list and dictionary comprehension. Can handle duplicate keys
{v:[i for i in d.keys() if d[i] == v ] for k,v in d.items()}
A case where the dictionary values is a set. Like:
some_dict = {"1":{"a","b","c"},
"2":{"d","e","f"},
"3":{"g","h","i"}}
The inverse would like:
some_dict = {vi: k for k, v in some_dict.items() for vi in v}
The output is like this:
{'c': '1',
'b': '1',
'a': '1',
'f': '2',
'd': '2',
'e': '2',
'g': '3',
'h': '3',
'i': '3'}
For instance, you have the following dictionary:
my_dict = {'a': 'fire', 'b': 'ice', 'c': 'fire', 'd': 'water'}
And you wanna get it in such an inverted form:
inverted_dict = {'fire': ['a', 'c'], 'ice': ['b'], 'water': ['d']}
First Solution. For inverting key-value pairs in your dictionary use a for-loop approach:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have non-unique values
inverted_dict = dict()
for key, value in my_dict.items():
inverted_dict.setdefault(value, list()).append(key)
Second Solution. Use a dictionary comprehension approach for inversion:
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have unique values
inverted_dict = {value: key for key, value in my_dict.items()}
Third Solution. Use reverting the inversion approach (relies on the second solution):
# Use this code to invert dictionaries that have lists of values
my_dict = {value: key for key in inverted_dict for value in my_map[key]}
Lot of answers but didn't find anything clean in case we are talking about a dictionary with non-unique values.
A solution would be:
from collections import defaultdict
inv_map = defaultdict(list)
for k, v in my_map.items():
inv_map[v].append(k)
Example:
If initial dict my_map = {'c': 1, 'd': 5, 'a': 5, 'b': 10}
then, running the code above will give:
{5: ['a', 'd'], 1: ['c'], 10: ['b']}
I found that this version is more than 10% faster than the accepted version of a dictionary with 10000 keys.
d = {i: str(i) for i in range(10000)}
new_d = dict(zip(d.values(), d.keys()))
In addition to the other functions suggested above, if you like lambdas:
invert = lambda mydict: {v:k for k, v in mydict.items()}
Or, you could do it this way too:
invert = lambda mydict: dict( zip(mydict.values(), mydict.keys()) )
I think the best way to do this is to define a class. Here is an implementation of a "symmetric dictionary":
class SymDict:
def __init__(self):
self.aToB = {}
self.bToA = {}
def assocAB(self, a, b):
# Stores and returns a tuple (a,b) of overwritten bindings
currB = None
if a in self.aToB: currB = self.bToA[a]
currA = None
if b in self.bToA: currA = self.aToB[b]
self.aToB[a] = b
self.bToA[b] = a
return (currA, currB)
def lookupA(self, a):
if a in self.aToB:
return self.aToB[a]
return None
def lookupB(self, b):
if b in self.bToA:
return self.bToA[b]
return None
Deletion and iteration methods are easy enough to implement if they're needed.
This implementation is way more efficient than inverting an entire dictionary (which seems to be the most popular solution on this page). Not to mention, you can add or remove values from your SymDict as much as you want, and your inverse-dictionary will always stay valid -- this isn't true if you simply reverse the entire dictionary once.
If the values aren't unique, and you're a little hardcore:
inv_map = dict(
(v, [k for (k, xx) in filter(lambda (key, value): value == v, my_map.items())])
for v in set(my_map.values())
)
Especially for a large dict, note that this solution is far less efficient than the answer Python reverse / invert a mapping because it loops over items() multiple times.
This handles non-unique values and retains much of the look of the unique case.
inv_map = {v:[k for k in my_map if my_map[k] == v] for v in my_map.itervalues()}
For Python 3.x, replace itervalues with values.
I am aware that this question already has many good answers, but I wanted to share this very neat solution that also takes care of duplicate values:
def dict_reverser(d):
seen = set()
return {v: k for k, v in d.items() if v not in seen or seen.add(v)}
This relies on the fact that set.add always returns None in Python.
Here is another way to do it.
my_map = {'a': 1, 'b': 2}
inv_map= {}
for key in my_map.keys() :
val = my_map[key]
inv_map[val] = key
dict([(value, key) for key, value in d.items()])
Function is symmetric for values of type list; Tuples are coverted to lists when performing reverse_dict(reverse_dict(dictionary))
def reverse_dict(dictionary):
reverse_dict = {}
for key, value in dictionary.iteritems():
if not isinstance(value, (list, tuple)):
value = [value]
for val in value:
reverse_dict[val] = reverse_dict.get(val, [])
reverse_dict[val].append(key)
for key, value in reverse_dict.iteritems():
if len(value) == 1:
reverse_dict[key] = value[0]
return reverse_dict
Since dictionaries require one unique key within the dictionary unlike values, we have to append the reversed values into a list of sort to be included within the new specific keys.
def r_maping(dictionary):
List_z=[]
Map= {}
for z, x in dictionary.iteritems(): #iterate through the keys and values
Map.setdefault(x,List_z).append(z) #Setdefault is the same as dict[key]=default."The method returns the key value available in the dictionary and if given key is not available then it will return provided default value. Afterward, we will append into the default list our new values for the specific key.
return Map
Fast functional solution for non-bijective maps (values not unique):
from itertools import imap, groupby
def fst(s):
return s[0]
def snd(s):
return s[1]
def inverseDict(d):
"""
input d: a -> b
output : b -> set(a)
"""
return {
v : set(imap(fst, kv_iter))
for (v, kv_iter) in groupby(
sorted(d.iteritems(),
key=snd),
key=snd
)
}
In theory this should be faster than adding to the set (or appending to the list) one by one like in the imperative solution.
Unfortunately the values have to be sortable, the sorting is required by groupby.
Try this for python 2.7/3.x
inv_map={};
for i in my_map:
inv_map[my_map[i]]=i
print inv_map
def invertDictionary(d):
myDict = {}
for i in d:
value = d.get(i)
myDict.setdefault(value,[]).append(i)
return myDict
print invertDictionary({'a':1, 'b':2, 'c':3 , 'd' : 1})
This will provide output as : {1: ['a', 'd'], 2: ['b'], 3: ['c']}
A lambda solution for current python 3.x versions:
d1 = dict(alice='apples', bob='bananas')
d2 = dict(map(lambda key: (d1[key], key), d1.keys()))
print(d2)
Result:
{'apples': 'alice', 'bananas': 'bob'}
This solution does not check for duplicates.
Some remarks:
The lambda construct can access d1 from the outer scope, so we only
pass in the current key. It returns a tuple.
The dict() constructor accepts a list of tuples. It
also accepts the result of a map, so we can skip the conversion to a
list.
This solution has no explicit for loop. It also avoids using a list comprehension for those who are bad at math ;-)
Taking up the highly voted answer starting If the values in my_map aren't unique:, I had a problem where not only the values were not unique, but in addition, they were a list, with each item in the list consisting again of a list of three elements: a string value, a number, and another number.
Example:
mymap['key1'] gives you:
[('xyz', 1, 2),
('abc', 5, 4)]
I wanted to switch only the string value with the key, keeping the two number elements at the same place. You simply need another nested for loop then:
inv_map = {}
for k, v in my_map.items():
for x in v:
# with x[1:3] same as x[1], x[2]:
inv_map[x[0]] = inv_map.get(x[0], []) + [k, x[1:3]]
Example:
inv_map['abc'] now gives you:
[('key1', 1, 2),
('key1', 5, 4)]
This works even if you have non-unique values in the original dictionary.
def dict_invert(d):
'''
d: dict
Returns an inverted dictionary
'''
# Your code here
inv_d = {}
for k, v in d.items():
if v not in inv_d.keys():
inv_d[v] = [k]
else:
inv_d[v].append(k)
inv_d[v].sort()
print(f"{inv_d[v]} are the values")
return inv_d
I would do it that way in python 2.
inv_map = {my_map[x] : x for x in my_map}
Not something completely different, just a bit rewritten recipe from Cookbook. It's futhermore optimized by retaining setdefault method, instead of each time getting it through the instance:
def inverse(mapping):
'''
A function to inverse mapping, collecting keys with simillar values
in list. Careful to retain original type and to be fast.
>> d = dict(a=1, b=2, c=1, d=3, e=2, f=1, g=5, h=2)
>> inverse(d)
{1: ['f', 'c', 'a'], 2: ['h', 'b', 'e'], 3: ['d'], 5: ['g']}
'''
res = {}
setdef = res.setdefault
for key, value in mapping.items():
setdef(value, []).append(key)
return res if mapping.__class__==dict else mapping.__class__(res)
Designed to be run under CPython 3.x, for 2.x replace mapping.items() with mapping.iteritems()
On my machine runs a bit faster, than other examples here