I want to combine these:
keys = ['name', 'age', 'food']
values = ['Monty', 42, 'spam']
into a single dictionary:
{'name': 'Monty', 'age': 42, 'food': 'spam'}
How can I do this?
Like this:
keys = ['a', 'b', 'c']
values = [1, 2, 3]
dictionary = dict(zip(keys, values))
print(dictionary) # {'a': 1, 'b': 2, 'c': 3}
Voila :-) The pairwise dict
constructor and zip
function are awesomely useful.
dictionary = {zip(keys, values)}
won't work. You have to explicitly declare as dict(...)
Aug 28, 2019 at 15:52
{thing}
is syntactic sugar to construct a set()
containing one element. {*iterable}
is syntactic sugar to construct a set
containing several elements. {k:v}
or {**mapping}
will construct a dict
, but that's syntactically quite distinct.
Aug 28, 2019 at 16:41
{}
for dictionaries. In fact, if we try type({})
the output is dict
. But indeed, if we try type({thing})
then the output is set
.
Aug 28, 2019 at 17:42
{k:v for k, v in zip(keys, values)}
. It turns out we can. +1.
Imagine that you have:
keys = ('name', 'age', 'food') values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
What is the simplest way to produce the following dictionary ?
dict = {'name' : 'Monty', 'age' : 42, 'food' : 'spam'}
dict
constructor with zip
new_dict = dict(zip(keys, values))
In Python 3, zip now returns a lazy iterator, and this is now the most performant approach.
dict(zip(keys, values))
does require the one-time global lookup each for dict
and zip
, but it doesn't form any unnecessary intermediate data-structures or have to deal with local lookups in function application.
A close runner-up to using the dict constructor is to use the native syntax of a dict comprehension (not a list comprehension, as others have mistakenly put it):
new_dict = {k: v for k, v in zip(keys, values)}
Choose this when you need to map or filter based on the keys or value.
In Python 2, zip
returns a list, to avoid creating an unnecessary list, use izip
instead (aliased to zip can reduce code changes when you move to Python 3).
from itertools import izip as zip
So that is still (2.7):
new_dict = {k: v for k, v in zip(keys, values)}
izip
from itertools
becomes zip
in Python 3. izip
is better than zip for Python 2 (because it avoids the unnecessary list creation), and ideal for 2.6 or below:
from itertools import izip
new_dict = dict(izip(keys, values))
In all cases:
>>> new_dict
{'age': 42, 'name': 'Monty', 'food': 'spam'}
If we look at the help on dict
we see that it takes a variety of forms of arguments:
>>> help(dict)
class dict(object)
| dict() -> new empty dictionary
| dict(mapping) -> new dictionary initialized from a mapping object's
| (key, value) pairs
| dict(iterable) -> new dictionary initialized as if via:
| d = {}
| for k, v in iterable:
| d[k] = v
| dict(**kwargs) -> new dictionary initialized with the name=value pairs
| in the keyword argument list. For example: dict(one=1, two=2)
The optimal approach is to use an iterable while avoiding creating unnecessary data structures. In Python 2, zip creates an unnecessary list:
>>> zip(keys, values)
[('name', 'Monty'), ('age', 42), ('food', 'spam')]
In Python 3, the equivalent would be:
>>> list(zip(keys, values))
[('name', 'Monty'), ('age', 42), ('food', 'spam')]
and Python 3's zip
merely creates an iterable object:
>>> zip(keys, values)
<zip object at 0x7f0e2ad029c8>
Since we want to avoid creating unnecessary data structures, we usually want to avoid Python 2's zip
(since it creates an unnecessary list).
This is a generator expression being passed to the dict constructor:
generator_expression = ((k, v) for k, v in zip(keys, values))
dict(generator_expression)
or equivalently:
dict((k, v) for k, v in zip(keys, values))
And this is a list comprehension being passed to the dict constructor:
dict([(k, v) for k, v in zip(keys, values)])
In the first two cases, an extra layer of non-operative (thus unnecessary) computation is placed over the zip iterable, and in the case of the list comprehension, an extra list is unnecessarily created. I would expect all of them to be less performant, and certainly not more-so.
In 64 bit Python 3.8.2 provided by Nix, on Ubuntu 16.04, ordered from fastest to slowest:
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: dict(zip(keys, values))))
0.6695233230129816
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: {k: v for k, v in zip(keys, values)}))
0.6941362579818815
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: {keys[i]: values[i] for i in range(len(keys))}))
0.8782548159942962
>>>
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: dict([(k, v) for k, v in zip(keys, values)])))
1.077607496001292
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: dict((k, v) for k, v in zip(keys, values))))
1.1840861019445583
dict(zip(keys, values))
wins even with small sets of keys and values, but for larger sets, the differences in performance will become greater.
A commenter said:
min
seems like a bad way to compare performance. Surelymean
and/ormax
would be much more useful indicators for real usage.
We use min
because these algorithms are deterministic. We want to know the performance of the algorithms under the best conditions possible.
If the operating system hangs for any reason, it has nothing to do with what we're trying to compare, so we need to exclude those kinds of results from our analysis.
If we used mean
, those kinds of events would skew our results greatly, and if we used max
we will only get the most extreme result - the one most likely affected by such an event.
A commenter also says:
In python 3.6.8, using mean values, the dict comprehension is indeed still faster, by about 30% for these small lists. For larger lists (10k random numbers), the
dict
call is about 10% faster.
I presume we mean dict(zip(...
with 10k random numbers. That does sound like a fairly unusual use case. It does makes sense that the most direct calls would dominate in large datasets, and I wouldn't be surprised if OS hangs are dominating given how long it would take to run that test, further skewing your numbers. And if you use mean
or max
I would consider your results meaningless.
Let's use a more realistic size on our top examples:
import numpy
import timeit
l1 = list(numpy.random.random(100))
l2 = list(numpy.random.random(100))
And we see here that dict(zip(...
does indeed run faster for larger datasets by about 20%.
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: {k: v for k, v in zip(l1, l2)}))
9.698965263989521
>>> min(timeit.repeat(lambda: dict(zip(l1, l2))))
7.9965161079890095
dict(zip(headList, textList))
& 1.95 \pm 0.030 microsec for {k: v for k, v in zip(headList, textList)}
. I would suggest the former for readability and speed. Obviously this gets at the min() vs mean() argument for timeit.
Jul 2, 2019 at 15:06
dict(zip(keys, values))
looks faster. Maybe you forgot to update something?
Apr 8, 2020 at 2:57
from future_builtins import zip
as an alternative to from itertools import izip as zip
that's slightly more explicit about describing the import in terms of getting the Python 3 zip
as a replacement for regular zip
. It's exactly equivalent to be clear (future_builtins.zip
is itself just an alias of itertools.izip
).
Oct 29, 2020 at 18:24
Try this:
>>> import itertools
>>> keys = ('name', 'age', 'food')
>>> values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
>>> adict = dict(itertools.izip(keys,values))
>>> adict
{'food': 'spam', 'age': 42, 'name': 'Monty'}
In Python 2, it's also more economical in memory consumption compared to zip
.
zip
is already economical in memory consumption. docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#zip In fact, you can see that six
uses zip
in Python 3 to replace itertools.izip
in Python 2 pythonhosted.org/six .
Feb 17, 2017 at 14:56
keys = ('name', 'age', 'food')
values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
out = dict(zip(keys, values))
Output:
{'food': 'spam', 'age': 42, 'name': 'Monty'}
You can also use dictionary comprehensions in Python ≥ 2.7:
>>> keys = ('name', 'age', 'food')
>>> values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
>>> {k: v for k, v in zip(keys, values)}
{'food': 'spam', 'age': 42, 'name': 'Monty'}
A more natural way is to use dictionary comprehension
keys = ('name', 'age', 'food')
values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
dict = {keys[i]: values[i] for i in range(len(keys))}
dict
object, why is it so?, thanks dude.
Aug 8, 2019 at 8:24
If you need to transform keys or values before creating a dictionary then a generator expression could be used. Example:
>>> adict = dict((str(k), v) for k, v in zip(['a', 1, 'b'], [2, 'c', 3]))
Take a look Code Like a Pythonista: Idiomatic Python.
with Python 3.x, goes for dict comprehensions
keys = ('name', 'age', 'food')
values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
dic = {k:v for k,v in zip(keys, values)}
print(dic)
More on dict comprehensions here, an example is there:
>>> print {i : chr(65+i) for i in range(4)}
{0 : 'A', 1 : 'B', 2 : 'C', 3 : 'D'}
For those who need simple code and aren’t familiar with zip
:
List1 = ['This', 'is', 'a', 'list']
List2 = ['Put', 'this', 'into', 'dictionary']
This can be done by one line of code:
d = {List1[n]: List2[n] for n in range(len(List1))}
for n in range(len(List1))
is an anti-pattern
Dec 18, 2019 at 12:41
Here is also an example of adding a list value in your dictionary:
listKey = ["Name", "Surname", "Age"]
listValue = [["Cyd", "Nikki", "Cindy"], ["Surname1", "Surname2", "Surname3"], [21, 32, 47]]
dic = dict(zip(listKey , listValue ))
print(dic)
always make sure the your "Key"(listKey) is always in the first parameter of dict.
For single value in your dictionary
singleKey = ["Name", "Surname", "Age"]
singleValue = ["Cyd"], ["Surname1"], [21]
dic = dict(zip(singleKey , singleValue ))
print(dic)
always make sure the your "Key"(singleKey ) is always in the first parameter of dict.
The output below of list
{
'Name': ['Cyd', 'Nikki', 'Cindy'],
'Surname': ['Surname1', 'Surname2', 'Surname3'],
'Age': [21, 32, 47]
}
Outpur of single value
{
'Name': ['Cyd'],
'Surname': ['Surname1'],
'Age': [21]
}
The best solution is still:
In [92]: keys = ('name', 'age', 'food')
...: values = ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
...:
In [93]: dt = dict(zip(keys, values))
In [94]: dt
Out[94]: {'age': 42, 'food': 'spam', 'name': 'Monty'}
Tranpose it:
lst = [('name', 'Monty'), ('age', 42), ('food', 'spam')]
keys, values = zip(*lst)
In [101]: keys
Out[101]: ('name', 'age', 'food')
In [102]: values
Out[102]: ('Monty', 42, 'spam')
I had this doubt while I was trying to solve a graph-related problem. The issue I had was I needed to define an empty adjacency list and wanted to initialize all the nodes with an empty list, that's when I thought how about I check if it is fast enough, I mean if it will be worth doing a zip operation rather than simple assignment key-value pair. After all most of the times, the time factor is an important ice breaker. So I performed timeit operation for both approaches.
import timeit
def dictionary_creation(n_nodes):
dummy_dict = dict()
for node in range(n_nodes):
dummy_dict[node] = []
return dummy_dict
def dictionary_creation_1(n_nodes):
keys = list(range(n_nodes))
values = [[] for i in range(n_nodes)]
graph = dict(zip(keys, values))
return graph
def wrapper(func, *args, **kwargs):
def wrapped():
return func(*args, **kwargs)
return wrapped
iteration = wrapper(dictionary_creation, n_nodes)
shorthand = wrapper(dictionary_creation_1, n_nodes)
for trail in range(1, 8):
print(f'Itertion: {timeit.timeit(iteration, number=trails)}\nShorthand: {timeit.timeit(shorthand, number=trails)}')
For n_nodes = 10,000,000 I get,
Iteration: 2.825081646999024 Shorthand: 3.535717916001886
Iteration: 5.051560923002398 Shorthand: 6.255070794999483
Iteration: 6.52859034499852 Shorthand: 8.221581164998497
Iteration: 8.683652416999394 Shorthand: 12.599181543999293
Iteration: 11.587241565001023 Shorthand: 15.27298851100204
Iteration: 14.816342867001367 Shorthand: 17.162912737003353
Iteration: 16.645022411001264 Shorthand: 19.976680120998935
You can clearly see after a certain point, iteration approach at n_th step overtakes the time taken by shorthand approach at n-1_th step.
you can use this below code:
dict(zip(['name', 'age', 'food'], ['Monty', 42, 'spam']))
But make sure that length of the lists will be same.if length is not same.then zip function turncate the longer one.
If you are working with more than 1 set of values and wish to have a list of dicts you can use this:
def as_dict_list(data: list, columns: list):
return [dict((zip(columns, row))) for row in data]
Real-life example would be a list of tuples from a db query paired to a tuple of columns from the same query. Other answers only provided for 1 to 1.
It can be done by the following way.
keys = ['name', 'age', 'food']
values = ['Monty', 42, 'spam']
dict = {}
for i in range(len(keys)):
dict[keys[i]] = values[i]
print(dict)
{'name': 'Monty', 'age': 42, 'food': 'spam'}
All answers sum up:
l = [1, 5, 8, 9]
ll = [3, 7, 10, 11]
zip:
dict(zip(l,ll)) # {1: 3, 5: 7, 8: 10, 9: 11}
#if you want to play with key or value @recommended
{k:v*10 for k, v in zip(l, ll)} #{1: 30, 5: 70, 8: 100, 9: 110}
counter:
d = {}
c=0
for k in l:
d[k] = ll[c] #setting up keys from the second list values
c += 1
print(d)
{1: 3, 5: 7, 8: 10, 9: 11}
enumerate:
d = {}
for i,k in enumerate(l):
d[k] = ll[i]
print(d)
{1: 3, 5: 7, 8: 10, 9: 11}
Most of the answers here mention zip()
to create tuples with an item from each of keys
and values
lists. This works fine as long as the lists have the same length. If the lists have different lengths, it stops at the shorter list; thus ignoring the remaining elements in the longer list. The following example illustrates this point:
keys = ['name', 'age', 'food']
values = ['Monty', 42]
dict(zip(keys, values)) # {'name': 'Monty', 'age': 42}
In cases where this behavior is not desirable, an analogous method itertools.zip_longest
exists in the standard library which creates an iterator that iterates until the longer list is exhausted. By default, the missing values are filled with None.
from itertools import zip_longest
dict(zip_longest(keys, values)) # {'name': 'Monty', 'age': 42, 'food': None}
It also accepts fillvalue=
kwarg, which can be used to specify what to fill in for the missing values.
dict(zip_longest(keys, values, fillvalue='spam')) # {'name': 'Monty', 'age': 42, 'food': 'spam'}
Note that if both lists have the same length, zip()
and itertools.zip_longest()
produce the same output:
keys = values = range(5)
dict(zip(keys, values)) == dict(zip_longest(keys, values)) # True
{k:v for k,v in zip(keys, values)} == {k:v for k,v in zip_longest(keys, values)} # True
Solution as dictionary comprehension with enumerate:
dict = {item : values[index] for index, item in enumerate(keys)}
Solution as for loop with enumerate:
dict = {}
for index, item in enumerate(keys):
dict[item] = values[index]
keys = ['name', 'age', 'food']
values = ['Monty', 42, 'spam']
dic = {}
c = 0
for i in keys:
dic[i] = values[c]
c += 1
print(dic)
{'name': 'Monty', 'age': 42, 'food': 'spam'}
import pprint
p = ['A', 'B', 'C']
q = [5, 2, 7]
r = ["M", "F", "M"]
s = ['Sovabazaar','Shyambazaar','Bagbazaar','Hatkhola']
def makeDictUsingAlternateLists1(**rest):
print("*rest.keys() : ",*rest.keys())
print("rest.keys() : ",rest.keys())
print("*rest.values() : ",*rest.values())
print("**rest.keys() : ",rest.keys())
print("**rest.values() : ",rest.values())
[print(a) for a in zip(*rest.values())]
[ print(dict(zip(rest.keys(),a))) for a in zip(*rest.values())]
print("...")
finalRes= [ dict( zip( rest.keys(),a)) for a in zip(*rest.values())]
return finalRes
l = makeDictUsingAlternateLists1(p=p,q=q,r=r,s=s)
pprint.pprint(l)
"""
*rest.keys() : p q r s
rest.keys() : dict_keys(['p', 'q', 'r', 's'])
*rest.values() : ['A', 'B', 'C'] [5, 2, 7] ['M', 'F', 'M'] ['Sovabazaar', 'Shyambazaar', 'Bagbazaar', 'Hatkhola']
**rest.keys() : dict_keys(['p', 'q', 'r', 's'])
**rest.values() : dict_values([['A', 'B', 'C'], [5, 2, 7], ['M', 'F', 'M'], ['Sovabazaar', 'Shyambazaar', 'Bagbazaar', 'Hatkhola']])
('A', 5, 'M', 'Sovabazaar')
('B', 2, 'F', 'Shyambazaar')
('C', 7, 'M', 'Bagbazaar')
{'p': 'A', 'q': 5, 'r': 'M', 's': 'Sovabazaar'}
{'p': 'B', 'q': 2, 'r': 'F', 's': 'Shyambazaar'}
{'p': 'C', 'q': 7, 'r': 'M', 's': 'Bagbazaar'}
...
[{'p': 'A', 'q': 5, 'r': 'M', 's': 'Sovabazaar'},
{'p': 'B', 'q': 2, 'r': 'F', 's': 'Shyambazaar'},
{'p': 'C', 'q': 7, 'r': 'M', 's': 'Bagbazaar'}]
"""
method without zip function
l1 = [1,2,3,4,5]
l2 = ['a','b','c','d','e']
d1 = {}
for l1_ in l1:
for l2_ in l2:
d1[l1_] = l2_
l2.remove(l2_)
break
print (d1)
{1: 'd', 2: 'b', 3: 'e', 4: 'a', 5: 'c'}
Although there are multiple ways of doing this but i think most fundamental way of approaching it; creating a loop and dictionary and store values into that dictionary. In the recursive approach the idea is still same it but instead of using a loop, the function called itself until it reaches to the end. Of course there are other approaches like using dict(zip(key, value))
and etc. These aren't the most effective solutions.
y = [1,2,3,4]
x = ["a","b","c","d"]
# This below is a brute force method
obj = {}
for i in range(len(y)):
obj[y[i]] = x[i]
print(obj)
# Recursive approach
obj = {}
def map_two_lists(a,b,j=0):
if j < len(a):
obj[b[j]] = a[j]
j +=1
map_two_lists(a, b, j)
return obj
res = map_two_lists(x,y)
print(res)
Both the results should print
{1: 'a', 2: 'b', 3: 'c', 4: 'd'}