On StackOverflow you can read numerous questions on "flattening" nested lists in Python.
They all have a similar form.
"How do I flatten this list [ [ 1, 2, 3 ], [ 4, 5, 6 ], ... , [ 98, 99, 100 ] ]?"
The answers include list comprehensions, itertools, and other clever variants.
[STRIKEOUT:All] Much of which is [STRIKEOUT:simply wrong] inappropriate.
You're Doing it Wrong
The only way to create a nested list is to append a list to a list.
theList.append( aSubList )
You can trivially replace this with the following
theList.extend( aSubList )
Now, your list is created flat. If it's created flat, you never need to flatten it.
Obscure Edge Cases
Sometimes it may be necessary to have both a flattened and an unflattened list. I'm unclear on when or how this situation arises, but this may be edge case that makes some of itertools handy.
For the past 3 decades, I've never seen the "both nested and not nested" use case, so I can't fathom why or how this would arise.
Visiting a Tree
Interestingly, a tree visitor has a net effect somewhat like "flattening". However, it does not actually create an intermediate flat structure. It simply walks the structure as it exists. This isn't a proper use case for transforming a nested list structure to a flat structure. Indeed, this is a great example of why nested structures and flat structures are quite separate use cases.
I think we can safely remove itertools altogether ...
Unknown<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 11:20:30.210000-04:00
I think we can safely remove itertools altogether after this.
Bit of an odd statement that you've never seen...
Unknown<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 17:07:40.628000-04:00
Bit of an odd statement that you've never seen "both nested and not nested" use cases. Consider a simple tree built via lists- walking the tree depth/breadth is "flattening the list" (more so visitation, but I digress).
The usage scenario where nested/not nested is extremely common...
This is pretty naive. The times I've needed t...
Michael<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 10:20:04.707000-04:00
This is pretty naive. The times I've needed to flatten a list were because I needed the non-flattened form for one thing, and the flattened form for another thing. It's not like we just don't know about extend versus append.
so, remove itertools.chain() from the standard lib ?
mike bayer<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 11:05:36.985000-04:00
so, remove itertools.chain() from the standard lib ?
List.append is not even close to the only way to c...
John<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 14:58:00.388000-04:00
List.append is not even close to the only way to create nested lists. The first counterexample that springs to mind is when you map a function over a list where the result of the function is a list.
> The only way to create a nested list is to ap...
Jason<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-07 12:31:22.159000-04:00
> The only way to create a nested list is to append a list to a list. Note quite true. One case I had the other day was like: # got input data like this:
>>> row = ["Apples", "100", "40 +- 10", "50 +- 4"]
>>> row = [c.Split("+-") for c in row]
>>> row
[['Apples'], ['100'], ['40 ', ' 10'], ['50 ', ' 4']]
Where I wanted to flatten "row" to:
['Apples', '100', '40 ', ' 10', '50 ', ' 4']
(Later stripping whitespace and converting everything where applicable to float.)
I ended up naming each column explicitly, something like this:
>>> a,b,c,d = row
>>> c1, c2 = c.Split("+-")
...
...
which is in the real code pretty verbose and ugly. Wish Python had a list.flatten(optional_depth) method...
(Reposted with slightly better formatting. I'v...
Chris Leary<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-08 18:14:43.601000-04:00
(Reposted with slightly better formatting. I've made a mental note that typing reStructuredText into arbitrary text boxes doesn't usually end well.) People were extremely defensive about this post for some reason. I think it's an excellent point -- if you don't need the nested structure for something else, you should be creating a flat sequence to begin with. As a corollary, you may prefer a for-loop to a list comprehension if you use a transform function that creates a list, but want a flattened result at the end. For example,
flat = []
for item in seq:
flat += transform(item)
As preferable to:
nested = (transform(item) for item in seq) flat = itertools.chain.from_iterable(nested)
The former certainly gets the point across with less jargon, if ``nested`` is created by you (as opposed to being passed in from elsewhere).
Naive indeed. Besides the nested version being us...
Unknown<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 12:04:53.652000-04:00
Naive indeed. Besides the nested version being useful as well, what about working with data structures that one didn't create. :/ Uninspired.
I often have lists of objects each of which has an...
Noufal<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 13:43:13.736000-04:00
I often have lists of objects each of which has an attribute which holds a list of different objects. This is nested list like situation which I can flatten using minor alterations to the solutions provided on Stack Overflow. I don't think your suggestion would apply here. OTOH, I've generally noticed that extend is used a lot lesser than append.
@Michael: Are you sure it creates intermediate lis...
Theran Cochran<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-07 02:44:38.313000-04:00
@Michael: Are you sure it creates intermediate lists? After testing in Python 2.6.2, the += operator extends the existing list, and does not create a new one. The id() of the list does not change at any point in the loop. However, if you write 'L = L + newitems' you do indeed get a bunch of new objects.
Putting nesting aside, I find myself using the fol...
Michael Watkins<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 15:38:56.108000-04:00
Putting nesting aside, I find myself using the following rather than [].extend([]): >>> L = [1,2,3] >>> L += [4,5,6] >>> L [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]
@Nacho
Your list comprehension is, in effect, doi...
Wyatt<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-11 15:44:43.690000-04:00
@Nacho Your list comprehension is, in effect, doing an append. You should just use a normal loop: row = [...] stuff = [] for item in row: ....stuff += item.split('+-') Reusing the name row isn't saving you anything, and this version is clearer, *and* it gets you what you want.
Chris Leary<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-08 18:12:08.065000-04:00
This comment has been removed by the author.
@Michael Watkins: I would be careful about getting...
Michael<noreply@blogger.com>
2009-10-06 16:38:49.660000-04:00
@Michael Watkins: I would be careful about getting into that habit. If you do that in a loop, you create a bunch of intermediate lists and it'll get slow really fast.