Python Zipping identical iterables

  • Thread starter Thread starter ergospherical
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
When zipping identical iterables created from a list, each call to iter(a) generates a new iterator, allowing zip to produce distinct tuples for each iteration. This results in tuples that reflect the progression of values from the original list rather than repeating the same value. The discussion suggests using itertools.tee for better handling of iterators if multiple independent iterators are needed. An alternative approach is simply using [a] instead of [iter(a)], which maintains the same time complexity while reducing space usage. Overall, the code provided is efficient and effective for converting a 1D array into a 2D array format.
ergospherical
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Education Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
1,097
Reaction score
1,384
Let a be a list (say a = [0,1,2,3,...]), then construct a list of n iterables iter(a),
Python:
it = [iter(a)] * n
When I go to unzip this, e.g.
Python:
for x in zip(*it):
Then x is (0,1,...,n-1), then (n,n+1,...,2n-1), etc.
Just trying to iron out why this works. Because schematically, *it is unpacking it into

*it = iter(a), iter(a), ..., iter(a)

And then zip(*it) should be joining together the first values of each of those n iterables, then the second, etc.

I assume it's because each time iter(a) is seen in zip, the iterable value is updated?
Otherwise x would be (0,0,...,0), then (1,1,...,1) etc.?
 
Technology news on Phys.org
ergospherical said:
I assume it's because each time iter(a) is seen in zip, the iterable value is updated?
Iter(a) is a function that returns the next value from the iterable. Each next value will only be returned once from a given iterable.

What you want for what it looks like you are trying to do in the OP is itertools.tee. At least, if you insist on doing it using iterators, instead of just doing it = ([list(a)] * n). Or even just it = [a] * n if you aren't going to mutate a itself anywhere.
 
iter(a)is the iterable, not a . E.g. look at the following implementation of converting a 1d array a to a m by n 2d array,

Python:
def to_2d_array(a: List[int], m: int, n: int) -> List[List[int]]:
        if m*n != len(a):
            return []
        ans = []
        it = [iter(a)] * n
        for row in zip(*it):
            ans.append(row)
        return ans

zip(*it) is the new iterable built by unpacking itand then calling zip
 
ergospherical said:
iter(a)is the iterable
No, iter(a) returns an iterator, not an iterable. a itself is the iterable.

I strongly suggest that you try the alternatives I gave.
 
The code itself is fine, and quite good (O(m*n) time and O(1) extra space)
 
ergospherical said:
iter(a)is the iterable, not a .
As I've already said, a itself is an iterable. Calling iter on it returns an iterator (as you can easily see by inspecting its type in the REPL). The iterator also works like an iterable if you call other functions on it that take iterables as arguments, as you are doing. But [a] itself would work just as well, since the actual iteration is done implicitly by the for loop, and that loop is over the zip return value, which treats iter(a) exactly the same as a itself.

ergospherical said:
The code itself is fine, and quite good (O(m*n) time and O(1) extra space)
The alternative I suggested, using just [a] instead of [iter(a)], will run in the same big-O time (since that's unavoidable) and will use even less extra space, since you are not constructing an unnecessary extra iterator over [a].
 
Dear Peeps I have posted a few questions about programing on this sectio of the PF forum. I want to ask you veterans how you folks learn program in assembly and about computer architecture for the x86 family. In addition to finish learning C, I am also reading the book From bits to Gates to C and Beyond. In the book, it uses the mini LC3 assembly language. I also have books on assembly programming and computer architecture. The few famous ones i have are Computer Organization and...
I have a quick questions. I am going through a book on C programming on my own. Afterwards, I plan to go through something call data structures and algorithms on my own also in C. I also need to learn C++, Matlab and for personal interest Haskell. For the two topic of data structures and algorithms, I understand there are standard ones across all programming languages. After learning it through C, what would be the biggest issue when trying to implement the same data...
Back
Top