I realise that if you have an iterable you should always use .join(iterable) instead of for x in y: str += x. But if there's only a fixed number of variables that aren't already in an iterable, is using .join() still the recommended way?
For example I have
user = 'username'
host = 'host'
should I do
ret = user + '#' + host
or
ret = '#'.join([user, host])
I'm not so much asking from a performance point of view, since both will be pretty trivial. But I've read people on here say always use .join() and I was wondering if there's any particular reason for that or if it's just generally a good idea to use .join().
If you're creating a string like that, you normally want to use string formatting:
>>> user = 'username'
>>> host = 'host'
>>> '%s#%s' % (user, host)
'username#host'
Python 2.6 added another form, which doesn't rely on operator overloading and has some extra features:
>>> '{0}#{1}'.format(user, host)
'username#host'
As a general guideline, most people will use + on strings only if they're adding two strings right there. For more parts or more complex strings, they either use string formatting, like above, or assemble elements in a list and join them together (especially if there's any form of looping involved.) The reason for using str.join() is that adding strings together means creating a new string (and potentially destroying the old ones) for each addition. Python can sometimes optimize this away, but str.join() quickly becomes clearer, more obvious and significantly faster.
I take the question to mean: "Is it ok to do this:"
ret = user + '#' + host
..and the answer is yes. That is perfectly fine.
You should, of course, be aware of the cool formatting stuff you can do in Python, and you should be aware that for long lists, "join" is the way to go, but for a simple situation like this, what you have is exactly right. It's simple and clear, and performance will not be an issue.
(I'm pretty sure all of the people pointing at string formatting are missing the question entirely.)
Creating a string by constructing an array and joining it is for performance reasons only. Unless you need that performance, or unless it happens to be the natural way to implement it anyway, there's no benefit to doing that rather than simple string concatenation.
Saying '#'.join([user, host]) is unintuitive. It makes me wonder: why is he doing this? Are there any subtleties to it; is there any case where there might be more than one '#'? The answer is no, of course, but it takes more time to come to that conclusion than if it was written in a natural way.
Don't contort your code merely to avoid string concatenation; there's nothing inherently wrong with it. Joining arrays is just an optimization.
I'll just note that I've always tended to use in-place concatenation until I was rereading a portion of the Python general style PEP PEP-8 Style Guide for Python Code.
Code should be written in a way that does not disadvantage other
implementations of Python (PyPy, Jython, IronPython, Pyrex, Psyco,
and such).
For example, do not rely on CPython's efficient implementation of
in-place string concatenation for statements in the form a+=b or a=a+b.
Those statements run more slowly in Jython. In performance sensitive
parts of the library, the ''.join() form should be used instead. This
will ensure that concatenation occurs in linear time across various
implementations.
Going by this, I have been converting to the practice of using joins so that I may retain the habit as a more automatic practice when efficiency is extra critical.
So I'll put in my vote for:
ret = '#'.join([user, host])
I use next:
ret = '%s#%s' % (user, host)
I recommend join() over concatenation, based on two aspects:
Faster.
More elegant.
Regarding the first aspect, here's an example:
import timeit
s1 = "Flowers"
s2 = "of"
s3 = "War"
def join_concat():
return s1 + " " + s2 + " " + s3
def join_builtin():
return " ".join((s1, s2, s3))
print("Join Concatenation: ", timeit.timeit(join_concat))
print("Join Builtin: ", timeit.timeit(join_builtin))
The output:
$ python3 join_test.py
Join Concatenation: 0.40386943198973313
Join Builtin: 0.2666833929979475
Considering a huge dataset (millions of lines) and its processing, 130 milliseconds per line, it's too much.
And for the second aspect, indeed, is more elegant.
Related
I would like to put an int into a string. This is what I am doing at the moment:
num = 40
plot.savefig('hanning40.pdf') #problem line
I have to run the program for several different numbers, so I'd like to do a loop. But inserting the variable like this doesn't work:
plot.savefig('hanning', num, '.pdf')
How do I insert a variable into a Python string?
See also
If you tried using + to concatenate a number with a string (or between strings, etc.) and got an error message, see How can I concatenate str and int objects?.
If you are trying to assemble a URL with variable data, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is error-prone and more difficult than necessary. Specialized tools are available. See Add params to given URL in Python.
If you are trying to assemble a SQL query, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is a major security risk. This is the cause of "SQL injection" which costs real companies huge amounts of money every year. See for example Python: best practice and securest way to connect to MySQL and execute queries for proper techniques.
If you just want to print (output) the string, you can prepare it this way first, or if you don't need the string for anything else, print each piece of the output individually using a single call to print. See How can I print multiple things (fixed text and/or variable values) on the same line, all at once? for details on both approaches.
Using f-strings:
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
This was added in 3.6 and is the new preferred way.
Using str.format():
plot.savefig('hanning{0}.pdf'.format(num))
String concatenation:
plot.savefig('hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf')
Conversion Specifier:
plot.savefig('hanning%s.pdf' % num)
Using local variable names (neat trick):
plot.savefig('hanning%(num)s.pdf' % locals())
Using string.Template:
plot.savefig(string.Template('hanning${num}.pdf').substitute(locals()))
See also:
Fancier Output Formatting - The Python Tutorial
Python 3's f-Strings: An Improved String Formatting Syntax (Guide) - RealPython
With the introduction of formatted string literals ("f-strings" for short) in Python 3.6, it is now possible to write this with a briefer syntax:
>>> name = "Fred"
>>> f"He said his name is {name}."
'He said his name is Fred.'
With the example given in the question, it would look like this
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
plot.savefig('hanning(%d).pdf' % num)
The % operator, when following a string, allows you to insert values into that string via format codes (the %d in this case). For more details, see the Python documentation:
printf-style String Formatting
You can use + as the normal string concatenation function as well as str().
"hello " + str(10) + " world" == "hello 10 world"
In general, you can create strings using:
stringExample = "someString " + str(someNumber)
print(stringExample)
plot.savefig(stringExample)
If you would want to put multiple values into the string you could make use of format
nums = [1,2,3]
plot.savefig('hanning{0}{1}{2}.pdf'.format(*nums))
Would result in the string hanning123.pdf. This can be done with any array.
Special cases
Depending on why variable data is being used with strings, the general-purpose approaches may not be appropriate.
If you need to prepare an SQL query
Do not use any of the usual techniques for assembling a string. Instead, use your SQL library's functionality for parameterized queries.
A query is code, so it should not be thought about like normal text. Using the library will make sure that any inserted text is properly escaped. If any part of the query could possibly come from outside the program in any way, that is an opportunity for a malevolent user to perform SQL injection. This is widely considered one of the important computer security problems, costing real companies huge amounts of money every year and causing problems for countless customers. Even if you think you know the data is "safe", there is no real upside to using any other approach.
The syntax will depend on the library you are using and is outside the scope of this answer.
If you need to prepare a URL query string
See Add params to given URL in Python. Do not do it yourself; there is no practical reason to make your life harder.
Writing to a file
While it's possible to prepare a string ahead of time, it may be simpler and more memory efficient to just write each piece of data with a separate .write call. Of course, non-strings will still need to be converted to string before writing, which may complicate the code. There is not a one-size-fits-all answer here, but choosing badly will generally not matter very much.
If you are simply calling print
The built-in print function accepts a variable number of arguments, and can take in any object and stringify it using str. Before trying string formatting, consider whether simply passing multiple arguments will do what you want. (You can also use the sep keyword argument to control spacing between the arguments.)
# display a filename, as an example
print('hanning', num, '.pdf', sep='')
Of course, there may be other reasons why it is useful for the program to assemble a string; so by all means do so where appropriate.
It's important to note that print is a special case. The only functions that work this way are ones that are explicitly written to work this way. For ordinary functions and methods, like input, or the savefig method of Matplotlib plots, we need to prepare a string ourselves.
Concatenation
Python supports using + between two strings, but not between strings and other types. To work around this, we need to convert other values to string explicitly: 'hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf'.
Template-based approaches
Most ways to solve the problem involve having some kind of "template" string that includes "placeholders" that show where information should be added, and then using some function or method to add the missing information.
f-strings
This is the recommended approach when possible. It looks like f'hanning{num}.pdf'. The names of variables to insert appear directly in the string. It is important to note that there is not actually such a thing as an "f-string"; it's not a separate type. Instead, Python will translate the code ahead of time:
>>> def example(num):
... return f'hanning{num}.pdf'
...
>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis(example)
2 0 LOAD_CONST 1 ('hanning')
2 LOAD_FAST 0 (num)
4 FORMAT_VALUE 0
6 LOAD_CONST 2 ('.pdf')
8 BUILD_STRING 3
10 RETURN_VALUE
Because it's a special syntax, it can access opcodes that aren't used in other approaches.
str.format
This is the recommended approach when f-strings aren't possible - mainly, because the template string needs to be prepared ahead of time and filled in later. It looks like 'hanning{}.pdf'.format(num), or 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=num)'. Here, format is a method built in to strings, which can accept arguments either by position or keyword.
Particularly for str.format, it's useful to know that the built-in locals, globals and vars functions return dictionaries that map variable names to the contents of those variables. Thus, rather than something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(a=a, b=b, c=c), we can use something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(**locals()), unpacking the locals() dict.
str.format_map
This is a rare variation on .format. It looks like 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map({'num': num}). Rather than accepting keyword arguments, it accepts a single argument which is a mapping.
That probably doesn't sound very useful - after all, rather than 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map(my_dict), we could just as easily write 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(**my_dict). However, this is useful for mappings that determine values on the fly, rather than ordinary dicts. In these cases, unpacking with ** might not work, because the set of keys might not be determined ahead of time; and trying to unpack keys based on the template is unwieldy (imagine: 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=my_mapping[num]), with a separate argument for each placeholder).
string.Formatter
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Formatter class. Using it looks like string.Formatter().format('hanning{num}.pdf', num=num). The template string uses the same syntax again. This is obviously clunkier than just calling .format on the string; the motivation is to allow users to subclass Formatter to define a different syntax for the template string.
All of the above approaches use a common "formatting language" (although string.Formatter allows changing it); there are many other things that can be put inside the {}. Explaining how it works is beyond the scope of this answer; please consult the documentation. Do keep in mind that literal { and } characters need to be escaped by doubling them up. The syntax is presumably inspired by C#.
The % operator
This is a legacy way to solve the problem, inspired by C and C++. It has been discouraged for a long time, but is still supported. It looks like 'hanning%s.pdf' % num, for simple cases. As you'd expect, literal '%' symbols in the template need to be doubled up to escape them.
It has some issues:
It seems like the conversion specifier (the letter after the %) should match the type of whatever is being interpolated, but that's not actually the case. Instead, the value is converted to the specified type, and then to string from there. This isn't normally necessary; converting directly to string works most of the time, and converting to other types first doesn't help most of the rest of the time. So 's' is almost always used (unless you want the repr of the value, using 'r'). Despite that, the conversion specifier is a mandatory part of the syntax.
Tuples are handled specially: passing a tuple on the right-hand side is the way to provide multiple arguments. This is an ugly special case that's necessary because we aren't using function-call syntax. As a result, if you actually want to format a tuple into a single placeholder, it must be wrapped in a 1-tuple.
Other sequence types are not handled specially, and the different behaviour can be a gotcha.
string.Template
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Template class. Instances provide substitute and safe_substitute methods that work similarly to the built-in .format (safe_substitute will leave placeholders intact rather than raising an exception when the arguments don't match). This should also be considered a legacy approach to the problem.
It looks like string.Template('hanning$num.pdf').substitute(num=num), and is inspired by traditional Perl syntax. It's obviously clunkier than the .format approach, since a separate class has to be used before the method is available. Braces ({}) can be used optionally around the name of the variable, to avoid ambiguity. Similarly to the other methods, literal '$' in the template needs to be doubled up for escaping.
I had a need for an extended version of this: instead of embedding a single number in a string, I needed to generate a series of file names of the form 'file1.pdf', 'file2.pdf' etc. This is how it worked:
['file' + str(i) + '.pdf' for i in range(1,4)]
You can make dict and substitute variables in your string.
var = {"name": "Abdul Jalil", "age": 22}
temp_string = "My name is %(name)s. I am %(age)s years old." % var
I would like to put an int into a string. This is what I am doing at the moment:
num = 40
plot.savefig('hanning40.pdf') #problem line
I have to run the program for several different numbers, so I'd like to do a loop. But inserting the variable like this doesn't work:
plot.savefig('hanning', num, '.pdf')
How do I insert a variable into a Python string?
See also
If you tried using + to concatenate a number with a string (or between strings, etc.) and got an error message, see How can I concatenate str and int objects?.
If you are trying to assemble a URL with variable data, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is error-prone and more difficult than necessary. Specialized tools are available. See Add params to given URL in Python.
If you are trying to assemble a SQL query, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is a major security risk. This is the cause of "SQL injection" which costs real companies huge amounts of money every year. See for example Python: best practice and securest way to connect to MySQL and execute queries for proper techniques.
If you just want to print (output) the string, you can prepare it this way first, or if you don't need the string for anything else, print each piece of the output individually using a single call to print. See How can I print multiple things (fixed text and/or variable values) on the same line, all at once? for details on both approaches.
Using f-strings:
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
This was added in 3.6 and is the new preferred way.
Using str.format():
plot.savefig('hanning{0}.pdf'.format(num))
String concatenation:
plot.savefig('hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf')
Conversion Specifier:
plot.savefig('hanning%s.pdf' % num)
Using local variable names (neat trick):
plot.savefig('hanning%(num)s.pdf' % locals())
Using string.Template:
plot.savefig(string.Template('hanning${num}.pdf').substitute(locals()))
See also:
Fancier Output Formatting - The Python Tutorial
Python 3's f-Strings: An Improved String Formatting Syntax (Guide) - RealPython
With the introduction of formatted string literals ("f-strings" for short) in Python 3.6, it is now possible to write this with a briefer syntax:
>>> name = "Fred"
>>> f"He said his name is {name}."
'He said his name is Fred.'
With the example given in the question, it would look like this
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
plot.savefig('hanning(%d).pdf' % num)
The % operator, when following a string, allows you to insert values into that string via format codes (the %d in this case). For more details, see the Python documentation:
printf-style String Formatting
You can use + as the normal string concatenation function as well as str().
"hello " + str(10) + " world" == "hello 10 world"
In general, you can create strings using:
stringExample = "someString " + str(someNumber)
print(stringExample)
plot.savefig(stringExample)
If you would want to put multiple values into the string you could make use of format
nums = [1,2,3]
plot.savefig('hanning{0}{1}{2}.pdf'.format(*nums))
Would result in the string hanning123.pdf. This can be done with any array.
Special cases
Depending on why variable data is being used with strings, the general-purpose approaches may not be appropriate.
If you need to prepare an SQL query
Do not use any of the usual techniques for assembling a string. Instead, use your SQL library's functionality for parameterized queries.
A query is code, so it should not be thought about like normal text. Using the library will make sure that any inserted text is properly escaped. If any part of the query could possibly come from outside the program in any way, that is an opportunity for a malevolent user to perform SQL injection. This is widely considered one of the important computer security problems, costing real companies huge amounts of money every year and causing problems for countless customers. Even if you think you know the data is "safe", there is no real upside to using any other approach.
The syntax will depend on the library you are using and is outside the scope of this answer.
If you need to prepare a URL query string
See Add params to given URL in Python. Do not do it yourself; there is no practical reason to make your life harder.
Writing to a file
While it's possible to prepare a string ahead of time, it may be simpler and more memory efficient to just write each piece of data with a separate .write call. Of course, non-strings will still need to be converted to string before writing, which may complicate the code. There is not a one-size-fits-all answer here, but choosing badly will generally not matter very much.
If you are simply calling print
The built-in print function accepts a variable number of arguments, and can take in any object and stringify it using str. Before trying string formatting, consider whether simply passing multiple arguments will do what you want. (You can also use the sep keyword argument to control spacing between the arguments.)
# display a filename, as an example
print('hanning', num, '.pdf', sep='')
Of course, there may be other reasons why it is useful for the program to assemble a string; so by all means do so where appropriate.
It's important to note that print is a special case. The only functions that work this way are ones that are explicitly written to work this way. For ordinary functions and methods, like input, or the savefig method of Matplotlib plots, we need to prepare a string ourselves.
Concatenation
Python supports using + between two strings, but not between strings and other types. To work around this, we need to convert other values to string explicitly: 'hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf'.
Template-based approaches
Most ways to solve the problem involve having some kind of "template" string that includes "placeholders" that show where information should be added, and then using some function or method to add the missing information.
f-strings
This is the recommended approach when possible. It looks like f'hanning{num}.pdf'. The names of variables to insert appear directly in the string. It is important to note that there is not actually such a thing as an "f-string"; it's not a separate type. Instead, Python will translate the code ahead of time:
>>> def example(num):
... return f'hanning{num}.pdf'
...
>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis(example)
2 0 LOAD_CONST 1 ('hanning')
2 LOAD_FAST 0 (num)
4 FORMAT_VALUE 0
6 LOAD_CONST 2 ('.pdf')
8 BUILD_STRING 3
10 RETURN_VALUE
Because it's a special syntax, it can access opcodes that aren't used in other approaches.
str.format
This is the recommended approach when f-strings aren't possible - mainly, because the template string needs to be prepared ahead of time and filled in later. It looks like 'hanning{}.pdf'.format(num), or 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=num)'. Here, format is a method built in to strings, which can accept arguments either by position or keyword.
Particularly for str.format, it's useful to know that the built-in locals, globals and vars functions return dictionaries that map variable names to the contents of those variables. Thus, rather than something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(a=a, b=b, c=c), we can use something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(**locals()), unpacking the locals() dict.
str.format_map
This is a rare variation on .format. It looks like 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map({'num': num}). Rather than accepting keyword arguments, it accepts a single argument which is a mapping.
That probably doesn't sound very useful - after all, rather than 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map(my_dict), we could just as easily write 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(**my_dict). However, this is useful for mappings that determine values on the fly, rather than ordinary dicts. In these cases, unpacking with ** might not work, because the set of keys might not be determined ahead of time; and trying to unpack keys based on the template is unwieldy (imagine: 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=my_mapping[num]), with a separate argument for each placeholder).
string.Formatter
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Formatter class. Using it looks like string.Formatter().format('hanning{num}.pdf', num=num). The template string uses the same syntax again. This is obviously clunkier than just calling .format on the string; the motivation is to allow users to subclass Formatter to define a different syntax for the template string.
All of the above approaches use a common "formatting language" (although string.Formatter allows changing it); there are many other things that can be put inside the {}. Explaining how it works is beyond the scope of this answer; please consult the documentation. Do keep in mind that literal { and } characters need to be escaped by doubling them up. The syntax is presumably inspired by C#.
The % operator
This is a legacy way to solve the problem, inspired by C and C++. It has been discouraged for a long time, but is still supported. It looks like 'hanning%s.pdf' % num, for simple cases. As you'd expect, literal '%' symbols in the template need to be doubled up to escape them.
It has some issues:
It seems like the conversion specifier (the letter after the %) should match the type of whatever is being interpolated, but that's not actually the case. Instead, the value is converted to the specified type, and then to string from there. This isn't normally necessary; converting directly to string works most of the time, and converting to other types first doesn't help most of the rest of the time. So 's' is almost always used (unless you want the repr of the value, using 'r'). Despite that, the conversion specifier is a mandatory part of the syntax.
Tuples are handled specially: passing a tuple on the right-hand side is the way to provide multiple arguments. This is an ugly special case that's necessary because we aren't using function-call syntax. As a result, if you actually want to format a tuple into a single placeholder, it must be wrapped in a 1-tuple.
Other sequence types are not handled specially, and the different behaviour can be a gotcha.
string.Template
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Template class. Instances provide substitute and safe_substitute methods that work similarly to the built-in .format (safe_substitute will leave placeholders intact rather than raising an exception when the arguments don't match). This should also be considered a legacy approach to the problem.
It looks like string.Template('hanning$num.pdf').substitute(num=num), and is inspired by traditional Perl syntax. It's obviously clunkier than the .format approach, since a separate class has to be used before the method is available. Braces ({}) can be used optionally around the name of the variable, to avoid ambiguity. Similarly to the other methods, literal '$' in the template needs to be doubled up for escaping.
I had a need for an extended version of this: instead of embedding a single number in a string, I needed to generate a series of file names of the form 'file1.pdf', 'file2.pdf' etc. This is how it worked:
['file' + str(i) + '.pdf' for i in range(1,4)]
You can make dict and substitute variables in your string.
var = {"name": "Abdul Jalil", "age": 22}
temp_string = "My name is %(name)s. I am %(age)s years old." % var
I would like to put an int into a string. This is what I am doing at the moment:
num = 40
plot.savefig('hanning40.pdf') #problem line
I have to run the program for several different numbers, so I'd like to do a loop. But inserting the variable like this doesn't work:
plot.savefig('hanning', num, '.pdf')
How do I insert a variable into a Python string?
See also
If you tried using + to concatenate a number with a string (or between strings, etc.) and got an error message, see How can I concatenate str and int objects?.
If you are trying to assemble a URL with variable data, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is error-prone and more difficult than necessary. Specialized tools are available. See Add params to given URL in Python.
If you are trying to assemble a SQL query, do not use ordinary string formatting, because it is a major security risk. This is the cause of "SQL injection" which costs real companies huge amounts of money every year. See for example Python: best practice and securest way to connect to MySQL and execute queries for proper techniques.
If you just want to print (output) the string, you can prepare it this way first, or if you don't need the string for anything else, print each piece of the output individually using a single call to print. See How can I print multiple things (fixed text and/or variable values) on the same line, all at once? for details on both approaches.
Using f-strings:
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
This was added in 3.6 and is the new preferred way.
Using str.format():
plot.savefig('hanning{0}.pdf'.format(num))
String concatenation:
plot.savefig('hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf')
Conversion Specifier:
plot.savefig('hanning%s.pdf' % num)
Using local variable names (neat trick):
plot.savefig('hanning%(num)s.pdf' % locals())
Using string.Template:
plot.savefig(string.Template('hanning${num}.pdf').substitute(locals()))
See also:
Fancier Output Formatting - The Python Tutorial
Python 3's f-Strings: An Improved String Formatting Syntax (Guide) - RealPython
With the introduction of formatted string literals ("f-strings" for short) in Python 3.6, it is now possible to write this with a briefer syntax:
>>> name = "Fred"
>>> f"He said his name is {name}."
'He said his name is Fred.'
With the example given in the question, it would look like this
plot.savefig(f'hanning{num}.pdf')
plot.savefig('hanning(%d).pdf' % num)
The % operator, when following a string, allows you to insert values into that string via format codes (the %d in this case). For more details, see the Python documentation:
printf-style String Formatting
You can use + as the normal string concatenation function as well as str().
"hello " + str(10) + " world" == "hello 10 world"
In general, you can create strings using:
stringExample = "someString " + str(someNumber)
print(stringExample)
plot.savefig(stringExample)
If you would want to put multiple values into the string you could make use of format
nums = [1,2,3]
plot.savefig('hanning{0}{1}{2}.pdf'.format(*nums))
Would result in the string hanning123.pdf. This can be done with any array.
Special cases
Depending on why variable data is being used with strings, the general-purpose approaches may not be appropriate.
If you need to prepare an SQL query
Do not use any of the usual techniques for assembling a string. Instead, use your SQL library's functionality for parameterized queries.
A query is code, so it should not be thought about like normal text. Using the library will make sure that any inserted text is properly escaped. If any part of the query could possibly come from outside the program in any way, that is an opportunity for a malevolent user to perform SQL injection. This is widely considered one of the important computer security problems, costing real companies huge amounts of money every year and causing problems for countless customers. Even if you think you know the data is "safe", there is no real upside to using any other approach.
The syntax will depend on the library you are using and is outside the scope of this answer.
If you need to prepare a URL query string
See Add params to given URL in Python. Do not do it yourself; there is no practical reason to make your life harder.
Writing to a file
While it's possible to prepare a string ahead of time, it may be simpler and more memory efficient to just write each piece of data with a separate .write call. Of course, non-strings will still need to be converted to string before writing, which may complicate the code. There is not a one-size-fits-all answer here, but choosing badly will generally not matter very much.
If you are simply calling print
The built-in print function accepts a variable number of arguments, and can take in any object and stringify it using str. Before trying string formatting, consider whether simply passing multiple arguments will do what you want. (You can also use the sep keyword argument to control spacing between the arguments.)
# display a filename, as an example
print('hanning', num, '.pdf', sep='')
Of course, there may be other reasons why it is useful for the program to assemble a string; so by all means do so where appropriate.
It's important to note that print is a special case. The only functions that work this way are ones that are explicitly written to work this way. For ordinary functions and methods, like input, or the savefig method of Matplotlib plots, we need to prepare a string ourselves.
Concatenation
Python supports using + between two strings, but not between strings and other types. To work around this, we need to convert other values to string explicitly: 'hanning' + str(num) + '.pdf'.
Template-based approaches
Most ways to solve the problem involve having some kind of "template" string that includes "placeholders" that show where information should be added, and then using some function or method to add the missing information.
f-strings
This is the recommended approach when possible. It looks like f'hanning{num}.pdf'. The names of variables to insert appear directly in the string. It is important to note that there is not actually such a thing as an "f-string"; it's not a separate type. Instead, Python will translate the code ahead of time:
>>> def example(num):
... return f'hanning{num}.pdf'
...
>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis(example)
2 0 LOAD_CONST 1 ('hanning')
2 LOAD_FAST 0 (num)
4 FORMAT_VALUE 0
6 LOAD_CONST 2 ('.pdf')
8 BUILD_STRING 3
10 RETURN_VALUE
Because it's a special syntax, it can access opcodes that aren't used in other approaches.
str.format
This is the recommended approach when f-strings aren't possible - mainly, because the template string needs to be prepared ahead of time and filled in later. It looks like 'hanning{}.pdf'.format(num), or 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=num)'. Here, format is a method built in to strings, which can accept arguments either by position or keyword.
Particularly for str.format, it's useful to know that the built-in locals, globals and vars functions return dictionaries that map variable names to the contents of those variables. Thus, rather than something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(a=a, b=b, c=c), we can use something like '{a}{b}{c}'.format(**locals()), unpacking the locals() dict.
str.format_map
This is a rare variation on .format. It looks like 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map({'num': num}). Rather than accepting keyword arguments, it accepts a single argument which is a mapping.
That probably doesn't sound very useful - after all, rather than 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format_map(my_dict), we could just as easily write 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(**my_dict). However, this is useful for mappings that determine values on the fly, rather than ordinary dicts. In these cases, unpacking with ** might not work, because the set of keys might not be determined ahead of time; and trying to unpack keys based on the template is unwieldy (imagine: 'hanning{num}.pdf'.format(num=my_mapping[num]), with a separate argument for each placeholder).
string.Formatter
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Formatter class. Using it looks like string.Formatter().format('hanning{num}.pdf', num=num). The template string uses the same syntax again. This is obviously clunkier than just calling .format on the string; the motivation is to allow users to subclass Formatter to define a different syntax for the template string.
All of the above approaches use a common "formatting language" (although string.Formatter allows changing it); there are many other things that can be put inside the {}. Explaining how it works is beyond the scope of this answer; please consult the documentation. Do keep in mind that literal { and } characters need to be escaped by doubling them up. The syntax is presumably inspired by C#.
The % operator
This is a legacy way to solve the problem, inspired by C and C++. It has been discouraged for a long time, but is still supported. It looks like 'hanning%s.pdf' % num, for simple cases. As you'd expect, literal '%' symbols in the template need to be doubled up to escape them.
It has some issues:
It seems like the conversion specifier (the letter after the %) should match the type of whatever is being interpolated, but that's not actually the case. Instead, the value is converted to the specified type, and then to string from there. This isn't normally necessary; converting directly to string works most of the time, and converting to other types first doesn't help most of the rest of the time. So 's' is almost always used (unless you want the repr of the value, using 'r'). Despite that, the conversion specifier is a mandatory part of the syntax.
Tuples are handled specially: passing a tuple on the right-hand side is the way to provide multiple arguments. This is an ugly special case that's necessary because we aren't using function-call syntax. As a result, if you actually want to format a tuple into a single placeholder, it must be wrapped in a 1-tuple.
Other sequence types are not handled specially, and the different behaviour can be a gotcha.
string.Template
The string standard library module contains a rarely used Template class. Instances provide substitute and safe_substitute methods that work similarly to the built-in .format (safe_substitute will leave placeholders intact rather than raising an exception when the arguments don't match). This should also be considered a legacy approach to the problem.
It looks like string.Template('hanning$num.pdf').substitute(num=num), and is inspired by traditional Perl syntax. It's obviously clunkier than the .format approach, since a separate class has to be used before the method is available. Braces ({}) can be used optionally around the name of the variable, to avoid ambiguity. Similarly to the other methods, literal '$' in the template needs to be doubled up for escaping.
I had a need for an extended version of this: instead of embedding a single number in a string, I needed to generate a series of file names of the form 'file1.pdf', 'file2.pdf' etc. This is how it worked:
['file' + str(i) + '.pdf' for i in range(1,4)]
You can make dict and substitute variables in your string.
var = {"name": "Abdul Jalil", "age": 22}
temp_string = "My name is %(name)s. I am %(age)s years old." % var
I've inherited some Python code that constructs a string from the string arguments passed into __init__:
self.full_tag = prefix + number + point + suffix
Maybe I'm just over-thinking it but is this the best way to concatenate the arguments? I know it's possible to do something like:
self.full_tag = "".join([prefix, number, point, suffix])
Or just using string format function:
self.full_tag = '{}{}{}{}'.format(prefix, number, point, suffix)
What is the Python way of doing this?
Pythonic way is to follow The Zen of Python, which has several things to say about this case:
Beautiful is better than ugly.
Simple is better than complex.
Readability counts.
Add to that the famous quote by DonaldKnuth:
We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time:
premature optimization is the root of all evil.
With those in mind, the best of your choices is:
self.full_tag = prefix + number + point + suffix
Although, if number is really a number and point point is really a point, then this is more explicit:
self.full_tag = "%s%d.%s" % (prefix, number, suffix)
Explicit is better than implicit.
The documentation recommends join for better performance over +:
6. ... For performance sensitive code, it is preferable to use the str.join() method which assures consistent linear concatenation performance across versions and implementations.
If performance is not too important, it's more of a matter of taste.
Personally, I find "".join cleaner and more readable than all of those braces in the format version.
In Python, the where and when of using string concatenation versus string substitution eludes me. As the string concatenation has seen large boosts in performance, is this (becoming more) a stylistic decision rather than a practical one?
For a concrete example, how should one handle construction of flexible URIs:
DOMAIN = 'http://stackoverflow.com'
QUESTIONS = '/questions'
def so_question_uri_sub(q_num):
return "%s%s/%d" % (DOMAIN, QUESTIONS, q_num)
def so_question_uri_cat(q_num):
return DOMAIN + QUESTIONS + '/' + str(q_num)
Edit: There have also been suggestions about joining a list of strings and for using named substitution. These are variants on the central theme, which is, which way is the Right Way to do it at which time? Thanks for the responses!
Concatenation is (significantly) faster according to my machine. But stylistically, I'm willing to pay the price of substitution if performance is not critical. Well, and if I need formatting, there's no need to even ask the question... there's no option but to use interpolation/templating.
>>> import timeit
>>> def so_q_sub(n):
... return "%s%s/%d" % (DOMAIN, QUESTIONS, n)
...
>>> so_q_sub(1000)
'http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1000'
>>> def so_q_cat(n):
... return DOMAIN + QUESTIONS + '/' + str(n)
...
>>> so_q_cat(1000)
'http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1000'
>>> t1 = timeit.Timer('so_q_sub(1000)','from __main__ import so_q_sub')
>>> t2 = timeit.Timer('so_q_cat(1000)','from __main__ import so_q_cat')
>>> t1.timeit(number=10000000)
12.166618871951641
>>> t2.timeit(number=10000000)
5.7813972166853773
>>> t1.timeit(number=1)
1.103492206766532e-05
>>> t2.timeit(number=1)
8.5206360154188587e-06
>>> def so_q_tmp(n):
... return "{d}{q}/{n}".format(d=DOMAIN,q=QUESTIONS,n=n)
...
>>> so_q_tmp(1000)
'http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1000'
>>> t3= timeit.Timer('so_q_tmp(1000)','from __main__ import so_q_tmp')
>>> t3.timeit(number=10000000)
14.564135316080637
>>> def so_q_join(n):
... return ''.join([DOMAIN,QUESTIONS,'/',str(n)])
...
>>> so_q_join(1000)
'http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1000'
>>> t4= timeit.Timer('so_q_join(1000)','from __main__ import so_q_join')
>>> t4.timeit(number=10000000)
9.4431309007150048
Don't forget about named substitution:
def so_question_uri_namedsub(q_num):
return "%(domain)s%(questions)s/%(q_num)d" % locals()
Be wary of concatenating strings in a loop! The cost of string concatenation is proportional to the length of the result. Looping leads you straight to the land of N-squared. Some languages will optimize concatenation to the most recently allocated string, but it's risky to count on the compiler to optimize your quadratic algorithm down to linear. Best to use the primitive (join?) that takes an entire list of strings, does a single allocation, and concatenates them all in one go.
"As the string concatenation has seen large boosts in performance..."
If performance matters, this is good to know.
However, performance problems I've seen have never come down to string operations. I've generally gotten in trouble with I/O, sorting and O(n2) operations being the bottlenecks.
Until string operations are the performance limiters, I'll stick with things that are obvious. Mostly, that's substitution when it's one line or less, concatenation when it makes sense, and a template tool (like Mako) when it's large.
What you want to concatenate/interpolate and how you want to format the result should drive your decision.
String interpolation allows you to easily add formatting. In fact, your string interpolation version doesn't do the same thing as your concatenation version; it actually adds an extra forward slash before the q_num parameter. To do the same thing, you would have to write return DOMAIN + QUESTIONS + "/" + str(q_num) in that example.
Interpolation makes it easier to format numerics; "%d of %d (%2.2f%%)" % (current, total, total/current) would be much less readable in concatenation form.
Concatenation is useful when you don't have a fixed number of items to string-ize.
Also, know that Python 2.6 introduces a new version of string interpolation, called string templating:
def so_question_uri_template(q_num):
return "{domain}/{questions}/{num}".format(domain=DOMAIN,
questions=QUESTIONS,
num=q_num)
String templating is slated to eventually replace %-interpolation, but that won't happen for quite a while, I think.
I was just testing the speed of different string concatenation/substitution methods out of curiosity. A google search on the subject brought me here. I thought I would post my test results in the hope that it might help someone decide.
import timeit
def percent_():
return "test %s, with number %s" % (1,2)
def format_():
return "test {}, with number {}".format(1,2)
def format2_():
return "test {1}, with number {0}".format(2,1)
def concat_():
return "test " + str(1) + ", with number " + str(2)
def dotimers(func_list):
# runs a single test for all functions in the list
for func in func_list:
tmr = timeit.Timer(func)
res = tmr.timeit()
print "test " + func.func_name + ": " + str(res)
def runtests(func_list, runs=5):
# runs multiple tests for all functions in the list
for i in range(runs):
print "----------- TEST #" + str(i + 1)
dotimers(func_list)
...After running runtests((percent_, format_, format2_, concat_), runs=5), I found that the % method was about twice as fast as the others on these small strings. The concat method was always the slowest (barely). There were very tiny differences when switching the positions in the format() method, but switching positions was always at least .01 slower than the regular format method.
Sample of test results:
test concat_() : 0.62 (0.61 to 0.63)
test format_() : 0.56 (consistently 0.56)
test format2_() : 0.58 (0.57 to 0.59)
test percent_() : 0.34 (0.33 to 0.35)
I ran these because I do use string concatenation in my scripts, and I was wondering what the cost was. I ran them in different orders to make sure nothing was interfering, or getting better performance being first or last. On a side note, I threw in some longer string generators into those functions like "%s" + ("a" * 1024) and regular concat was almost 3 times as fast (1.1 vs 2.8) as using the format and % methods. I guess it depends on the strings, and what you are trying to achieve. If performance really matters, it might be better to try different things and test them. I tend to choose readability over speed, unless speed becomes a problem, but thats just me. SO didn't like my copy/paste, i had to put 8 spaces on everything to make it look right. I usually use 4.
Remember, stylistic decisions are practical decisions, if you ever plan on maintaining or debugging your code :-) There's a famous quote from Knuth (possibly quoting Hoare?): "We should forget about small efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: premature optimization is the root of all evil."
As long as you're careful not to (say) turn a O(n) task into an O(n2) task, I would go with whichever you find easiest to understand..
I use substitution wherever I can. I only use concatenation if I'm building a string up in say a for-loop.
Actually the correct thing to do, in this case (building paths) is to use os.path.join. Not string concatenation or interpolation