问题:Python中dict.clear()与分配{}之间的区别

在python中,调用clear()和分配{}给字典之间有区别吗?如果是,那是什么?例:

d = {"stuff":"things"}
d.clear()   #this way
d = {}      #vs this way

In python, is there a difference between calling clear() and assigning {} to a dictionary? If yes, what is it? Example:

d = {"stuff":"things"}
d.clear()   #this way
d = {}      #vs this way

回答 0

如果您还有另一个变量也引用相同的字典,则有很大的不同:

>>> d = {"stuff": "things"}
>>> d2 = d
>>> d = {}
>>> d2
{'stuff': 'things'}
>>> d = {"stuff": "things"}
>>> d2 = d
>>> d.clear()
>>> d2
{}

这是因为分配d = {}会创建一个新的空字典并将其分配给d变量。这样就d2指向旧字典,里面还有项目。但是,d.clear()清除相同的字典,d并且d2两者都指向。

If you have another variable also referring to the same dictionary, there is a big difference:

>>> d = {"stuff": "things"}
>>> d2 = d
>>> d = {}
>>> d2
{'stuff': 'things'}
>>> d = {"stuff": "things"}
>>> d2 = d
>>> d.clear()
>>> d2
{}

This is because assigning d = {} creates a new, empty dictionary and assigns it to the d variable. This leaves d2 pointing at the old dictionary with items still in it. However, d.clear() clears the same dictionary that d and d2 both point at.


回答 1

d = {}将为创建新实例,d但所有其他引用仍将指向旧内容。 d.clear()将重置内容,但是对同一实例的所有引用仍然正确。

d = {} will create a new instance for d but all other references will still point to the old contents. d.clear() will reset the contents, but all references to the same instance will still be correct.


回答 2

除了其他答案中提到的差异外,还存在速度差异。d = {}的速度是原来的两倍:

python -m timeit -s "d = {}" "for i in xrange(500000): d.clear()"
10 loops, best of 3: 127 msec per loop

python -m timeit -s "d = {}" "for i in xrange(500000): d = {}"
10 loops, best of 3: 53.6 msec per loop

In addition to the differences mentioned in other answers, there also is a speed difference. d = {} is over twice as fast:

python -m timeit -s "d = {}" "for i in xrange(500000): d.clear()"
10 loops, best of 3: 127 msec per loop

python -m timeit -s "d = {}" "for i in xrange(500000): d = {}"
10 loops, best of 3: 53.6 msec per loop

回答 3

为了说明前面已经提到的事情:

>>> a = {1:2}
>>> id(a)
3073677212L
>>> a.clear()
>>> id(a)
3073677212L
>>> a = {}
>>> id(a)
3073675716L

As an illustration for the things already mentioned before:

>>> a = {1:2}
>>> id(a)
3073677212L
>>> a.clear()
>>> id(a)
3073677212L
>>> a = {}
>>> id(a)
3073675716L

回答 4

除了@odano的答案外,d.clear()如果您想多次清除字典,使用起来似乎更快。

import timeit

p1 = ''' 
d = {}
for i in xrange(1000):
    d[i] = i * i
for j in xrange(100):
    d = {}
    for i in xrange(1000):
        d[i] = i * i
'''

p2 = ''' 
d = {}
for i in xrange(1000):
    d[i] = i * i
for j in xrange(100):
    d.clear()
    for i in xrange(1000):
        d[i] = i * i
'''

print timeit.timeit(p1, number=1000)
print timeit.timeit(p2, number=1000)

结果是:

20.0367929935
19.6444659233

In addition to @odano ‘s answer, it seems using d.clear() is faster if you would like to clear the dict for many times.

import timeit

p1 = ''' 
d = {}
for i in xrange(1000):
    d[i] = i * i
for j in xrange(100):
    d = {}
    for i in xrange(1000):
        d[i] = i * i
'''

p2 = ''' 
d = {}
for i in xrange(1000):
    d[i] = i * i
for j in xrange(100):
    d.clear()
    for i in xrange(1000):
        d[i] = i * i
'''

print timeit.timeit(p1, number=1000)
print timeit.timeit(p2, number=1000)

The result is:

20.0367929935
19.6444659233

回答 5

如果原始对象不在范围内,则突变方法总是有用的:

def fun(d):
    d.clear()
    d["b"] = 2

d={"a": 2}
fun(d)
d          # {'b': 2}

重新分配字典将创建一个新对象,而不会修改原始对象。

Mutating methods are always useful if the original object is not in scope:

def fun(d):
    d.clear()
    d["b"] = 2

d={"a": 2}
fun(d)
d          # {'b': 2}

Re-assigning the dictionary would create a new object and wouldn’t modify the original one.


回答 6

未提及的一件事是范围界定问题。这不是一个很好的例子,但是在这种情况下,我遇到了问题:

def conf_decorator(dec):
    """Enables behavior like this:
        @threaded
        def f(): ...

        or

        @threaded(thread=KThread)
        def f(): ...

        (assuming threaded is wrapped with this function.)
        Sends any accumulated kwargs to threaded.
        """
    c_kwargs = {}
    @wraps(dec)
    def wrapped(f=None, **kwargs):
        if f:
            r = dec(f, **c_kwargs)
            c_kwargs = {}
            return r
        else:
            c_kwargs.update(kwargs) #<- UnboundLocalError: local variable 'c_kwargs' referenced before assignment
            return wrapped
    return wrapped

解决方案是替换c_kwargs = {}c_kwargs.clear()

如果有人想出一个更实际的例子,请随时编辑此帖子。

One thing not mentioned is scoping issues. Not a great example, but here’s the case where I ran into the problem:

def conf_decorator(dec):
    """Enables behavior like this:
        @threaded
        def f(): ...

        or

        @threaded(thread=KThread)
        def f(): ...

        (assuming threaded is wrapped with this function.)
        Sends any accumulated kwargs to threaded.
        """
    c_kwargs = {}
    @wraps(dec)
    def wrapped(f=None, **kwargs):
        if f:
            r = dec(f, **c_kwargs)
            c_kwargs = {}
            return r
        else:
            c_kwargs.update(kwargs) #<- UnboundLocalError: local variable 'c_kwargs' referenced before assignment
            return wrapped
    return wrapped

The solution is to replace c_kwargs = {} with c_kwargs.clear()

If someone thinks up a more practical example, feel free to edit this post.


回答 7

另外,有时dict实例可能是dict的子类(defaultdict例如)。在这种情况下,clear首选使用using ,因为我们不必记住dict的确切类型,并且还避免重复代码(将清除行与初始化行耦合)。

x = defaultdict(list)
x[1].append(2)
...
x.clear() # instead of the longer x = defaultdict(list)

In addition, sometimes the dict instance might be a subclass of dict (defaultdict for example). In that case, using clear is preferred, as we don’t have to remember the exact type of the dict, and also avoid duplicate code (coupling the clearing line with the initialization line).

x = defaultdict(list)
x[1].append(2)
...
x.clear() # instead of the longer x = defaultdict(list)

声明:本站所有文章,如无特殊说明或标注,均为本站原创发布。任何个人或组织,在未征得本站同意时,禁止复制、盗用、采集、发布本站内容到任何网站、书籍等各类媒体平台。如若本站内容侵犯了原著者的合法权益,可联系我们进行处理。