On 06Sep2019 22:48, Ralf M. <ral...@t-online.de> wrote:
Recently I wrote a quick and dirty script to do some counting and statistics. When I re-read it a bit later I noticed that I had been using two different ways to create two-dimensional (default-)dicts. Now I'm wondering whether one of them is "better" or more pythonic than the other.

What I did:

ddd_a = collections.defaultdict(set)
ddd_a[(key1, key2)].add(foo)

ddd_b = collections.defaultdict(lambda: collections.defaultdict(set))
ddd_b[key1][key2].add(foo)

Both work as expected.

Trying to think about differences I only noticed that ddd_a more easily generalises to more dimensions, and ddd_b has the benefit that ddd_b[key1] is a dict, which might help if one "row" needs to be fed to a function that expects a dict.

More general ddd_a looks more symmetric (key1 and key2 are exchangeable, if done consistently) and ddd_b looks more hierarchic (like a tree traversed from root to leaves where key1, key2 etc. determine which way to go at each level). ddd_b also is more simmilar to how two-dimensional lists are done in python.

Any recommendations / comments as to which to prefer?

As you'd imagine, it depends on what yuou're doing.

If (key1,key2) are a Cartesian-like "space" of value, for example the domain of key2 values it the same regardless of key1, I lean toward (key1,key2).

If (key1,key2) are a tree like structure such as the clause names and field values form a .ini config file:

 [clause1]
 field1 = 1
 field2 = 3

 [clause2]
 field2 = 9

I lean towards the ddd_b[key1][key2] approach.

So: are they a "flat" space or a tree structure? The is my normal rule of thumb for deciding how to key things.

In particular, if you need to ask "what are the key2 values for key1==x?" then you might want a tree structure.

The ddd_a (key1,key2) approach is easier to manage in terms of creating new nodes. OTOH, using a nested defaultdict can handle that work for you:

 ddd_d = defaultdict(lambda: defaultdict(int))

(Pick a suitable type in place of "int" maybe.)

Cheers,
Cameron Simpson <c...@cskk.id.au>
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Reply via email to