Multiple levels of ‘collection.defaultdict’ in Python

Thanks to some great folks on SO, I discovered the possibilities offered by collections.defaultdict, notably in readability and speed. I have put them to use with success.

Now I would like to implement three levels of dictionaries, the two top ones being defaultdict and the lowest one being int. I don’t find the appropriate way to do this. Here is my attempt:

from collections import defaultdict
d = defaultdict(defaultdict)
a = [("key1", {"a1":22, "a2":33}),
     ("key2", {"a1":32, "a2":55}),
     ("key3", {"a1":43, "a2":44})]
for i in a:
    d[i[0]] = i[1]

Now this works, but the following, which is the desired behavior, doesn’t:

d["key4"]["a1"] + 1

I suspect that I should have declared somewhere that the second level defaultdict is of type int, but I didn’t find where or how to do so.

The reason I am using defaultdict in the first place is to avoid having to initialize the dictionary for each new key.

Any more elegant suggestion?

Thanks pythoneers!

Answers:

Thank you for visiting the Q&A section on Magenaut. Please note that all the answers may not help you solve the issue immediately. So please treat them as advisements. If you found the post helpful (or not), leave a comment & I’ll get back to you as soon as possible.

Method 1

Use:

from collections import defaultdict
d = defaultdict(lambda: defaultdict(int))

This will create a new defaultdict(int) whenever a new key is accessed in d.

Method 2

Another way to make a pickleable, nested defaultdict is to use a partial object instead of a lambda:

from functools import partial
...
d = defaultdict(partial(defaultdict, int))

This will work because the defaultdict class is globally accessible at the module level:

“You can’t pickle a partial object unless the function [or in this
case, class] it wraps is globally accessible … under its __name__
(within its __module__)”
— Pickling wrapped partial functions

Method 3

Look at nosklo’s answer here for a more general solution.

class AutoVivification(dict):
    """Implementation of perl's autovivification feature."""
    def __getitem__(self, item):
        try:
            return dict.__getitem__(self, item)
        except KeyError:
            value = self[item] = type(self)()
            return value

Testing:

a = AutoVivification()

a[1][2][3] = 4
a[1][3][3] = 5
a[1][2]['test'] = 6

print a

Output:

{1: {2: {'test': 6, 3: 4}, 3: {3: 5}}}

Method 4

As per @rschwieb’s request for D['key'] += 1, we can expand on previous by overriding addition by defining __add__ method, to make this behave more like a collections.Counter()

First __missing__ will be called to create a new empty value, which will be passed into __add__. We test the value, counting on empty values to be False.

See emulating numeric types for more information on overriding.

from numbers import Number


class autovivify(dict):
    def __missing__(self, key):
        value = self[key] = type(self)()
        return value

    def __add__(self, x):
        """ override addition for numeric types when self is empty """
        if not self and isinstance(x, Number):
            return x
        raise ValueError

    def __sub__(self, x):
        if not self and isinstance(x, Number):
            return -1 * x
        raise ValueError

Examples:

>>> import autovivify
>>> a = autovivify.autovivify()
>>> a
{}
>>> a[2]
{}
>>> a
{2: {}}
>>> a[4] += 1
>>> a[5][3][2] -= 1
>>> a
{2: {}, 4: 1, 5: {3: {2: -1}}}

Rather than checking argument is a Number (very non-python, amirite!) we could just provide a default 0 value and then attempt the operation:

class av2(dict):
    def __missing__(self, key):
        value = self[key] = type(self)()
        return value

    def __add__(self, x):
        """ override addition when self is empty """
        if not self:
            return 0 + x
        raise ValueError

    def __sub__(self, x):
        """ override subtraction when self is empty """
        if not self:
            return 0 - x
        raise ValueError

Method 5

Late to the party, but for arbitrary depth I just found myself doing something like this:

from collections import defaultdict

class DeepDict(defaultdict):
    def __call__(self):
        return DeepDict(self.default_factory)

The trick here is basically to make the DeepDict instance itself a valid factory for constructing missing values. Now we can do things like

dd = DeepDict(DeepDict(list))
dd[1][2].extend([3,4])
sum(dd[1][2])  # 7

ddd = DeepDict(DeepDict(DeepDict(list)))
ddd[1][2][3].extend([4,5])
sum(ddd[1][2][3])  # 9

Method 6

def _sub_getitem(self, k):
    try:
        # sub.__class__.__bases__[0]
        real_val = self.__class__.mro()[-2].__getitem__(self, k)
        val = '' if real_val is None else real_val
    except Exception:
        val = ''
        real_val = None
    # isinstance(Avoid,dict)也是true，会一直递归死
    if type(val) in (dict, list, str, tuple):
        val = type('Avoid', (type(val),), {'__getitem__': _sub_getitem, 'pop': _sub_pop})(val)
        # 重新赋值当前字典键为返回值，当对其赋值时可回溯
        if all([real_val is not None, isinstance(self, (dict, list)), type(k) is not slice]):
            self[k] = val
    return val


def _sub_pop(self, k=-1):
    try:
        val = self.__class__.mro()[-2].pop(self, k)
        val = '' if val is None else val
    except Exception:
        val = ''
    if type(val) in (dict, list, str, tuple):
        val = type('Avoid', (type(val),), {'__getitem__': _sub_getitem, 'pop': _sub_pop})(val)
    return val


class DefaultDict(dict):
    def __getitem__(self, k):
        return _sub_getitem(self, k)

    def pop(self, k):
        return _sub_pop(self, k)

In[8]: d=DefaultDict()
In[9]: d['a']['b']['c']['d']
Out[9]: ''
In[10]: d['a']="ggggggg"
In[11]: d['a']
Out[11]: 'ggggggg'
In[12]: d['a']['pp']
Out[12]: ''

No errors again.
No matter how many levels nested.
pop no error also

dd=DefaultDict({“1”:333333})

All methods was sourced from stackoverflow.com or stackexchange.com, is licensed under cc by-sa 2.5, cc by-sa 3.0 and cc by-sa 4.0