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
Related
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).
I am attempting a variant of this simple function:
def reverse_this(thisArray):
saved_first = thisArray[0]
thisArray = thisArray[1:]
thisArray.reverse()
thisArray.insert(0,saved_first)
myList = ['foo', 1,2,3,4,5]
reverse_this(myList)
print('after:', myList)
In essence, I want it to print out "after: ['foo', 5, 4, 3, 2, 1]". However, the slicing here seems to be causing some issues. It appears that the list is being modified as intended inside the function, however, the changes are not being applied outside the function to myList. What's going on here and how can I fix it?
Python is pass by assignment for passing arguments inside the function. When you do
thisArray = thisArray[1:]
inside your function, you re-bind the passed argument to a new object created inside your function and proceed to mutate that copy created after slicing instead, rather than modifying your argument thisArray. To get the modified value, one way is to return this modified list from your function:
def reverse_this(thisArray):
saved_first = thisArray[0]
thisArray = thisArray[1:]
thisArray.reverse()
thisArray.insert(0,saved_first)
return thisArray
myList = ['foo', 1,2,3,4,5]
myList = reverse_this(myList)
print('after:', myList)
Other way is to modify the list's contents (assign to the slice) rather than re-binding the list itself:
def reverse_this(thisArray):
saved_first = thisArray[0]
thisArray[:] = thisArray[1:] # assign to the sliced list's contents
thisArray.reverse()
thisArray.insert(0,saved_first)
thisArray is re-assigned to a new list object by slicing, so any changes after that don't affect the original list passed into the function. Note the instance IDs of the lists:
def reverse_this(thisArray):
saved_first = thisArray[0]
print(f'thisArray pre-slice: {id(thisArray):#x}')
thisArray = thisArray[1:]
print(f'thisArray post-slice: {id(thisArray):#x}')
thisArray.reverse()
thisArray.insert(0,saved_first)
myList = ['foo', 1,2,3,4,5]
print(f'myList pre-call: {id(myList):#x}')
reverse_this(myList)
print(f'myList post-call: {id(myList):#x}')
print('after:', myList)
myList pre-call: 0x1e2f5713500
thisArray pre-slice: 0x1e2f5713500 # parameter refers to original list
thisArray post-slice: 0x1e2f5753800 # thisArray refers to new list
myList post-call: 0x1e2f5713500 # original list isn't changed.
after: ['foo', 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]
In Python, variables are names of objects. If you mutate an object, all names of that object "see" the change. A slice makes a new object, and in this case the name was reassigned to the new object.
To fix it, assign the slice into the full range of the original list, which mutates the original list instead of creating a new one:
def reverse_this(thisArray):
saved_first = thisArray[0]
thisArray[:] = thisArray[1:] # replace entire content of original list with slice.
thisArray.reverse() # thisArray still refers to original list here.
thisArray.insert(0,saved_first)
myList = ['foo', 1,2,3,4,5]
reverse_this(myList)
print('after:', myList)
after: ['foo', 5, 4, 3, 2, 1]
When assigning to a slice, a section of a list is replaced in place with another list. It doesn't necessarily have to be the same size.
Another example:
>>> s = list(range(10))
>>> s
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9]
>>> id(s)
2339680033664
>>> s[4:7] = [10,10] # replace indices 4 up to but not including 7
>>> s
[0, 1, 2, 3, 10, 10, 7, 8, 9]
>>> id(s) # id didn't change
2339680033664
You can do the following to achieve the same thing:
def my_reverse(lst):
lst[1:] = reversed(lst[1:]) # Or lst[:0:-1]
Assigning to a list slice does not create any copies it simply replaces that slice.
See this.
What strange magic is this?
def rotate_list(lst, n):
n = n % len(lst)
lst = lst[-n:] + lst[:-n]
def rotate_list_2(lst):
lst[0], lst[1], lst[2], lst[3] = lst[3], lst[0], lst[1], lst[2]
s1 = [1, 2, 5, 4]
rotate_list(s1, 1)
print(s1)
s1 = [1, 2, 5, 4]
rotate_list_2(s1)
print(s1)
Output:
[1, 2, 5, 4]
[4, 1, 2, 5]
It appears that although lists are generally mutable within functions, if a list with the same name is created, then the original list is unaffected by changes to the new list. Could someone please explain what is happening here please, in terms of scope and references?
How would I rotate the original list without having to manually update each value as in rotate_list_2()? Or would this kind of thing generally be done by working with new lists returned from a function?
Assigning to list in function doesn't change the original reference.
The assignment just references the local parameter lst on the new value.
The original list referenced outside ('before') the function remains intact.
Insead assign to it's elements with this syntax:
def rotate_list(lst, n):
n = n % len(lst)
lst[:] = lst[-n:] + lst[:-n]
s1 = [1, 2, 5, 4]
rotate_list(s1, 1)
# And it works like magic! :)
# [4, 1, 2, 5]
print(s1)
If you reassign the argument of a function, the value does not change outside of the function scope.
def test0(a):
a = 10
print(a)
x = 4
test0(x)
print(x)
This would result in
10
4
The reason why assigning values of an array works is that you're not assigning a new value to the argument itself. You're instead accessing the memory that the array reads from, and you're changing it. Thus, those changes will happen even for outer scopes.
After change in the function you can return the list and capture it in function call like s=function(s)
>>> a = [1,2,3]
>>> b = []
>>> b.append(a)
>>> print(b)
[[1, 2, 3]]
>>> num = a.pop(0)
>>> a.append(num)
>>> print(a)
[2, 3, 1]
>>> b.append(a)
>>> print(b)
[[2, 3, 1], [2, 3, 1]]
>>>
Why is this happening and how to fix it? I need the list like
[[1, 2, 3], [2, 3, 1]]
Thank you.
Edit:
Also, why is this working?
>>> a = []
>>> b = []
>>> a = [1,2,3]
>>> b.append(a)
>>> a = [1,2,3,4]
>>> b.append(a)
>>> print(b)
[[1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4]]
>>>
'''
Append a copy of your list a, at least the first time. Otherwise, you've appended the same list both times.
b.append(a[:])
When you append the list a, python creates a reference to that variable inside the list b. So when you edit the list a, it is reflected again in the list b. You need to create a copy of your variable and then append it to get the desired result.
Every variable name in Python should be thought of as a reference to a piece of data. In your first listing, b contains two references to the same underlying object that is also referenced by the name a. That object gets changed in-place by the operations you’re using to rotate its members. The effect of that change is seen when you look at either of the two references to the object found in b, or indeed when you look at the reference associated with the name a.
Their identicality can be seen by using the id() function: id(a), id(b[0]) and id(b[1]) all return the same number, which is the unique identifier of the underlying list object that they all refer to. Or you can use the is operator: b[0] is b[1] evaluates to True.
By contrast, in the second listing, you reassign a—in other words, by using the assignment operator = you cause that name to become associated with a different object: in this case, a new list object that you just created with your square-bracketed literal expression. b still contains one reference to the old list, and now you append a new reference that points to this different piece of underlying data. So the two elements of b now look different from each other—and indeed they are different objects and accordingly have different id() numbers, only one of which is the same as the current id(a). b[0] is b[1] now evaluates to False
How to fix it? Reassign the name a before changing it: for example, create a copy:
a = list(a)
or:
import copy
a = copy.copy(a)
(or you could even use copy.deepcopy()—study the difference). Alternatively, rotate the members a using methods that entail reassignment rather than in-place changes—e.g.:
a = a[1:] + a[:1]
(NB immutable objects such as the tuple avoid this whole confusion —not because they behave fundamentally differently but because they lack methods that produce in-place changes and therefore force you to use reassignment strategies.)
In addition to making the copy of a by doing a[:] and assigning it to b.
You can also use collections.deque.rotate to rotate your list
from collections import deque
a = [1,2,3]
#Make a deque of copy of a
b = deque(a[:])
#Rotate the deque
b.rotate(len(a)-1)
#Create the list and print it
print([a,list(b)])
#[[1, 2, 3], [2, 3, 1]]
Sorry if this is a duplicate question, I searched and couldn't find anything to help.
I'm currently trying to compare two lists. If there are any matching items I will remove them all from one of the lists.
However the results I have are buggy. Here is a rough but accurate representation of the method I'm using:
>>> i = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
>>> a = i
>>> c = a
>>> for b in c:
if b in i:
a.remove(b)
>>> a
[2, 4, 6, 8]
>>> c
[2, 4, 6, 8]
So I realised that the main issue is that as I remove items it shortens the list, so Python then skips over the intermediate item (seriously annoying). As a result I made a third list to act as an intermediate that can be looped over.
What really baffles me is that this list seems to change also even when I haven't directly asked it to!
In python, when you write this:
i = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]
You create an Object (in this case, a list) and you assign it to the name i. Your next line, a = i, tells the interpreter that the name a refers to the same Object. If you want them to be separate Object you need to copy the original list. You can do that via the slicing shorthand, i[:], or you can use a = list(i) to be more explicit.
The easiest way to do this is use a set to determine shared items in a and b:
for x in set(a).intersection(b):
a.remove(x)
Your statements a = i and c = a merely make new names that reference the same object. Then as you removed things from a, it's removed from b and i, since they are the same object. You'll want to make copies of the lists instead, like so
a = i[:]
c = a[:]
a = i Doesn't make a copy of a list, it just sets another variable, i to point at your list a. Try something like this:
>>> i = [1, 2, 3, 2, 5, 6]
>>> s = []
>>> for i in t:
if i not in s:
s.append(i)
>>> s
[1, 2, 3, 5, 6]
You can also use set which guarantees no duplicates, but doesn't preserve the order:
list(set(i))