I was going through http://web2py.com/book/default/chapter/02 and found this:
>>> print 'number is ' + str(3)
number is 3
>>> print 'number is %s' % (3)
number is 3
>>> print 'number is %(number)s' % dict(number=3)
number is 3
It has been given that The last notation is more explicit and less error prone, and is to be preferred.
I am wondering what is the advantage of using the last notation.. will it not have a performance overhead?
>>> print 'number is ' + str(3)
number is 3
This is definitely the worst solution and might cause you problems if you do the beginner mistake "Value of obj: " + obj where obj is not a string or unicode object. For many concatenations, it's not readable at all - it's similar to something like echo "<p>Hello ".$username."!</p>"; in PHP (this can get arbitrarily ugly).
print 'number is %s' % (3)
number is 3
Now that is much better. Instead of a hard-to-read concatenation, you see the output format immediately. Coming back to the beginner mistake of outputting values, you can do print "Value of obj: %r" % obj, for example. I personally prefer this in most cases. But note that you cannot use it in gettext-translated strings if you have multiple format specifiers because the order might change in other languages.
As you forgot to mention it here, you can also use the new string formatting method which is similar:
>>> "number is {0}".format(3)
'number is 3'
Next, dict lookup:
>>> print 'number is %(number)s' % dict(number=3)
number is 3
As said before, gettext-translated strings might change the order of positional format specifiers, so this option is the best when working with translations. The performance drop should be negligible - if your program is not all about formatting strings.
As with the positional formatting, you can also do it in the new style:
>>> "number is {number}".format(number=3)
'number is 3'
It's hard to tell which one to take. I recommend you to use positional arguments with the % notation for simple strings and dict lookup formatting for translated strings.
I can think of a few differences.
First to me is cumbersome, if more than one variable is involved. I can not speak of performance penalty on that. See additional arguments below.
The second example is positional dependent and it can be easy to change position causing errors. It also does not tell you anything about the variables.
The third example, the position of variables is not important. You use a dictionary. This makes it elegant as it does not rely on positional structuring of variables.
See the example below:
>>> print 'number is %s %s' % (3,4)
number is 3 4
>>> print 'number is %s %s' % (4,3)
number is 4 3
>>> print 'number is %(number)s %(two)s' % dict(number=3, two=4)
number is 3 4
>>> print 'number is %(number)s %(two)s' % dict(two=4, number=3)
number is 3 4
>>>
Also another part of discussion on this
"+" is the string concatenation operator.
"%" is string formatting.
In this trivial case, string formatting accomplishes the same result as concatenation. Unlike string formatting, string concatenation only works when everything is already a string. So if you miss to convert your variables to string, concatenation will cause error.
[Edit: My answer was biased towards templating since the question came from web2py where templates are so commonly involved]
As Ryan says below, the concatenation is faster than formatting.
Suggestion is
Use the first form - concatenation, if you are concatenating just two strings
Use the second form, if there are few variables. You can invariably see the positions and deal with them
Use the third form when you are doing templating i.e. formatting a large piece of string with variable data. The dictionary form helps in providing meaning to variables inside the large piece of text.
I am wondering what is the advantage
of using the last notation..
Hm, as you said, the last notation is really more explicit and actually is less error prone.
will it not have a performance
overhead?
It will have little performance overhead, but it's minor if compared with data fetching from DB or network connections.
It's a bad, unjustified piece of advice.
The third method is cumbersome, violates DRY, and error prone, except if:
You are writing a framework which don't have control over the format string. For example, logging module, web2py, or gettext.
The format string is extremely long.
The format string is read from a file from a config file.
The problem with the third method should be obvious when you consider that foo appears three times in this code: "%(foo)s" % dict(foo=foo). This is error prone. Most programs should not use the third method, unless they know they need to.
The second method is the simplest method, and is what you generally use in most programs. It is best used when the format string is immediate, e.g. 'values: %s %s %s' % (a, b, c) instead of taken from a variable, e.g. fmt % (a, b, c).
The first concatenation is almost never useful, except perhaps if you're building list by loops:
s = ''
for x in l:
s += str(x)
however, in that case, it's generally better and faster to use str.join():
s = ''.join(str(x) for x in l)
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 been looking around and I've been unable to find a definitive answer to this question: what's the recommended way to print variables in Python?
So far, I've seen three ways: using commas, using percent signs, or using plus signs:
>>> a = "hello"
>>> b = "world"
>>> print a, "to the", b
hello to the world
>>> print "%s to the %s" % (a, b)
hello to the world
>>> print a + " to the " + b
hello to the world
Each method seems to have its pros and cons.
Commas allow to write the variable directly and add spaces, as well as automatically perform a string conversion if needed. But I seem to remember that good coding practices say that it's best to separate your variables from your text.
Percent signs allow that, though they require to use a list when there's more than one variable, and you have to write the type of the variable (though it seems able to convert even if the variable type isn't the same, like trying to print a number with %s).
Plus signs seem to be the "worst" as they mix variables and text, and don't convert on the fly; though maybe it is necessary to have more control on your variable from time to time.
I've looked around and it seems some of those methods may be obsolete nowadays. Since they all seem to work and each have their pros and cons, I'm wondering: is there a recommended method, or do they all depend on the context?
Including the values from identifiers inside a string is called string formatting. You can handle string formatting in different ways with various pros and cons.
Using string concatenation (+)
Con: You must manually convert objects to strings
Pro: The objects appear where you want to place the into the string
Con: The final layout may not be clear due to breaking the string literal
Using template strings (i.e. $bash-style substitution):
Pro: You may be familiar with shell variable expansion
Pro: Conversion to string is done automatically
Pro: Final layout is clear.
Con: You cannot specify how to perform the conversion
Using %-style formatting:
Pro: similar to formatting with C's printf.
Pro: conversions are done for you
Pro: you can specify different type of conversions, with some options (e.g. precision for floats)
Pro: The final layout is clear
Pro: You can also specify the name of the elements to substitute as in: %(name)s.
Con: You cannot customize handling of format specifiers.
Con: There are some corner cases that can puzzle you. To avoid them you should always use either tuple or dict as argument.
Using str.format:
All the pros of %-style formatting (except that it is not similar to printf)
Similar to .NET String.Format
Pro: You can manually specify numbered fields which allows you to use a positional argument multiple times
Pro: More options in the format specifiers
Pro: You can customize the formatting specifiers in custom types
The commas do not do string-formatting. They are part of the print statement statement syntax.
They have a softspace "feature" which is gone in python3 since print is a function now:
>>> print 'something\t', 'other'
something other
>>> print 'something\tother'
something other
Note how the above outputs are exactly equivalent even though the first one used comma.
This is because the comma doesn't introduce whitespace in certain situations (e.g. right after a tab or a newline).
In python3 this doesn't happen:
>>> print('something\t', 'other')
something other
>>> print('something\tother') # note the difference in spacing.
something other
Since python2.6 the preferred way of doing string formatting is using the str.format method. It was meant to replace the %-style formatting, even though currently there are no plans (and I don't there will ever be) to remove %-style formatting.
string.format() basics
Here are a couple of example of basic string substitution, the {} is the placeholder for the substituted variables. If no format is specified, it will insert and format as a string.
s1 = "so much depends upon {}".format("a red wheel barrow")
s2 = "glazed with {} water beside the {} chickens".format("rain", "white")
You can also use the numeric position of the variables and change them in the strings, this gives some flexibility when doing the formatting, if you made a mistake in the order you can easily correct without shuffling all variables around.
s1 = " {0} is better than {1} ".format("emacs", "vim")
s2 = " {1} is better than {0} ".format("emacs", "vim")
The format() function offers a fair amount of additional features and capabilities, here are a few useful tips and tricks using .format()
Named Arguments
You can use the new string format as a templating engine and use named arguments, instead of requiring a strict order.
madlib = " I {verb} the {object} off the {place} ".format(verb="took", object="cheese", place="table")
>>> I took the cheese off the table
Reuse Same Variable Multiple Times
Using the % formatter, requires a strict ordering of variables, the .format() method allows you to put them in any order as we saw above in the basics, but also allows for reuse.
str = "Oh {0}, {0}! wherefore art thou {0}?".format("Romeo")
>>> Oh Romeo, Romeo! wherefore art thou Romeo?
Use Format as a Function
You can use .format as a function which allows for some separation of text and formatting from code. For example at the beginning of your program you could include all your formats and then use later. This also could be a nice way to handle internationalization which not only requires different text but often requires different formats for numbers.
email_f = "Your email address was {email}".format
print(email_f(email="bob#example.com"))
Escaping Braces
If you need to use braces when using str.format(), just double up
print(" The {} set is often represented as {{0}} ".format("empty"))
>>> The empty set is often represented as {0}
the question is, wether you want print variables (case 1) or want to output formatted text (case 2). Case one is good and easy to use, mostly for debug output.
If you like to say something in a defined way, formatting is the better choice. '+' is not the pythonic way of string maipulation.
An alternative to % is "{0} to the {1}".format(a,b) and is the preferred way of formatting since Python 3.
Depends a bit on which version.
Python 2 will be simply:
print 'string'
print 345
print 'string'+(str(345))
print ''
Python 3 requires parentheses (wish it didn't personally)
print ('string')
print (345)
print ('string'+(str(345))
Also the most foolproof method to do it is to convert everything into a variable:
a = 'string'
b = 345
c = str(345)
d = a + c
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