index()
will give the first occurrence of an item in a list. Is there a neat trick which returns all indices in a list for an element?
You can use a list comprehension with enumerate
:
indices = [i for i, x in enumerate(my_list) if x == "whatever"]
The iterator enumerate(my_list)
yields pairs (index, item)
for each item in the list. Using i, x
as loop variable target unpacks these pairs into the index i
and the list item x
. We filter down to all x
that match our criterion, and select the indices i
of these elements.
While not a solution for lists directly, numpy
really shines for this sort of thing:
import numpy as np
values = np.array([1,2,3,1,2,4,5,6,3,2,1])
searchval = 3
ii = np.where(values == searchval)[0]
returns:
ii ==>array([2, 8])
This can be significantly faster for lists (arrays) with a large number of elements vs some of the other solutions.
A solution using list.index
:
def indices(lst, element):
result = []
offset = -1
while True:
try:
offset = lst.index(element, offset+1)
except ValueError:
return result
result.append(offset)
It's much faster than the list comprehension with enumerate
, for large lists. It is also much slower than the numpy
solution if you already have the array, otherwise the cost of converting outweighs the speed gain (tested on integer lists with 100, 1000 and 10000 elements).
NOTE: A note of caution based on Chris_Rands' comment: this solution is faster than the list comprehension if the results are sufficiently sparse, but if the list has many instances of the element that is being searched (more than ~15% of the list, on a test with a list of 1000 integers), the list comprehension is faster.
How about:
In [1]: l=[1,2,3,4,3,2,5,6,7]
In [2]: [i for i,val in enumerate(l) if val==3]
Out[2]: [2, 4]
more_itertools.locate
finds indices for all items that satisfy a condition.
from more_itertools import locate
list(locate([0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0]))
# [1, 2, 4]
list(locate(['a', 'b', 'c', 'b'], lambda x: x == 'b'))
# [1, 3]
more_itertools
is a third-party library > pip install more_itertools
.
occurrences = lambda s, lst: (i for i,e in enumerate(lst) if e == s)
list(occurrences(1, [1,2,3,1])) # = [0, 3]
Or Use range
(python 3):
l=[i for i in range(len(lst)) if lst[i]=='something...']
For (python 2):
l=[i for i in xrange(len(lst)) if lst[i]=='something...']
And then (both cases):
print(l)
Is as expected.
np.where
to find the indices of a single value, which is not faster than a list-comprehension, if the time to convert a list to an array is includednumpy
and converting a list
to a numpy.array
probably makes using numpy
a less efficient option for most circumstances. A careful timing analysis would be necessary.
list
, converting the list
to an array
, and then using numpy
functions will likely be a faster option.np.where
and np.unique
to find the indices of all unique elements in a list.
np.where
on an array (including the time to convert the list to an array) is slightly faster than a list-comprehension on a list, for finding all indices of all unique elements .numpy
on an array can be found in Get a list of all indices of repeated elements in a numpy arrayimport numpy as np
import random # to create test list
# create sample list
random.seed(365)
l = [random.choice(['s1', 's2', 's3', 's4']) for _ in range(20)]
# convert the list to an array for use with these numpy methods
a = np.array(l)
# create a dict of each unique entry and the associated indices
idx = {v: np.where(a == v)[0].tolist() for v in np.unique(a)}
# print(idx)
{'s1': [7, 9, 10, 11, 17],
's2': [1, 3, 6, 8, 14, 18, 19],
's3': [0, 2, 13, 16],
's4': [4, 5, 12, 15]}
%timeit
# create 2M element list
random.seed(365)
l = [random.choice(['s1', 's2', 's3', 's4']) for _ in range(2000000)]
# np.where: convert list to array
%%timeit
a = np.array(l)
np.where(a == 's1')
[out]:
409 ms ± 41.9 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
# list-comprehension: on list l
%timeit [i for i, x in enumerate(l) if x == "s1"]
[out]:
201 ms ± 24 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
# filter: on list l
%timeit list(filter(lambda i: l[i]=="s1", range(len(l))))
[out]:
344 ms ± 36.6 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
# use np.where and np.unique: convert list to array
%%timeit
a = np.array(l)
{v: np.where(a == v)[0].tolist() for v in np.unique(a)}
[out]:
682 ms ± 28 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
# list comprehension inside dict comprehension: on list l
%timeit {req_word: [idx for idx, word in enumerate(l) if word == req_word] for req_word in set(l)}
[out]:
713 ms ± 16.7 ms per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 1 loop each)
With enumerate(alist) you can store the first element (n) that is the index of the list when the element x is equal to what you look for.
>>> alist = ['foo', 'spam', 'egg', 'foo']
>>> foo_indexes = [n for n,x in enumerate(alist) if x=='foo']
>>> foo_indexes
[0, 3]
>>>
This function takes the item and the list as arguments and return the position of the item in the list, like we saw before.
def indexlist(item2find, list_or_string):
"Returns all indexes of an item in a list or a string"
return [n for n,item in enumerate(list_or_string) if item==item2find]
print(indexlist("1", "010101010"))
Output
[1, 3, 5, 7]
for n, i in enumerate([1, 2, 3, 4, 1]):
if i == 1:
print(n)
Output:
0
4
Using filter() in python2.
>>> q = ['Yeehaw', 'Yeehaw', 'Googol', 'B9', 'Googol', 'NSM', 'B9', 'NSM', 'Dont Ask', 'Googol']
>>> filter(lambda i: q[i]=="Googol", range(len(q)))
[2, 4, 9]
One more solution(sorry if duplicates) for all occurrences:
values = [1,2,3,1,2,4,5,6,3,2,1]
map(lambda val: (val, [i for i in xrange(len(values)) if values[i] == val]), values)
for-loop
:enumerate
and a list comprehension are more pythonic, but not necessarily faster. However, this answer is aimed at students who may not be allowed to use some of those built-in functions .indices
for i in range(len(x)):
, which essentially iterates through a list of index locations [0, 1, 2, 3, ..., len(x)-1]
i
, where x[i]
is a match to value
, to indices
def get_indices(x: list, value: int) -> list:
indices = list()
for i in range(len(x)):
if x[i] == value:
indices.append(i)
return indices
n = [1, 2, 3, -50, -60, 0, 6, 9, -60, -60]
print(get_indices(n, -60))
>>> [4, 8, 9]
get_indices
, are implemented with type hints . In this case, the list, n
, is a bunch of int
s, therefore we search for value
, also defined as an int
.while-loop
and .index
:.index
, use try-except
for error handling , because a ValueError
will occur if value
is not in the list
.def get_indices(x: list, value: int) -> list:
indices = list()
i = 0
while True:
try:
# find an occurrence of value and update i to that index
i = x.index(value, i)
# add i to the list
indices.append(i)
# advance i by 1
i += 1
except ValueError as e:
break
return indices
print(get_indices(n, -60))
>>> [4, 8, 9]
A dynamic list comprehension based solution incase we do not know in advance which element:
lst = ['to', 'be', 'or', 'not', 'to', 'be']
{req_word: [idx for idx, word in enumerate(lst) if word == req_word] for req_word in set(lst)}
results in:
{'be': [1, 5], 'or': [2], 'to': [0, 4], 'not': [3]}
You can think of all other ways along the same lines as well but with index()
you can find only one index although you can set occurrence number yourself.
If you need to search for all element's positions between certain indices , you can state them:
[i for i,x in enumerate([1,2,3,2]) if x==2 & 2<= i <=3] # -> [3]
You can create a defaultdict
from collections import defaultdict
d1 = defaultdict(int) # defaults to 0 values for keys
unq = set(lst1) # lst1 = [1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 1, 2, 7]
for each in unq:
d1[each] = lst1.count(each)
else:
print(d1)
If you are using Python 2, you can achieve the same functionality with this:
f = lambda my_list, value:filter(lambda x: my_list[x] == value, range(len(my_list)))
Where my_list
is the list you want to get the indexes of, and value
is the value searched. Usage:
f(some_list, some_element)
Generators are fast and use a tiny memory footprint. They give you flexibility in how you use the result.
def indices(iter, val):
"""Generator: Returns all indices of val in iter
Raises a ValueError if no val does not occur in iter
Passes on the AttributeError if iter does not have an index method (e.g. is a set)
"""
i = -1
NotFound = False
while not NotFound:
try:
i = iter.index(val, i+1)
except ValueError:
NotFound = True
else:
yield i
if i == -1:
raise ValueError("No occurrences of {v} in {i}".format(v = val, i = iter))
The above code can be use to create a list of the indices: list(indices(input,value))
; use them as dictionary keys: dict(indices(input,value))
; sum them: sum(indices(input,value))
; in a for loop for index_ in indices(input,value):
; ...etc... without creating an interim list/tuple or similar.
In a for loop you will get your next index back when you call for it, without waiting for all the others to be calculated first. That means: if you break out of the loop for some reason you save the time needed to find indices you never needed.
.index
on the input iter
to find the next occurrence of val
.index
to start at the point after the last found occurrenceindex
raises a ValueError
I tried four different versions for flow control; two EAFP (using try - except
) and two TBYL (with a logical test in the while
statement):
while True:
... except ValueError: break
. Surprisingly, this was usually a touch slower than option 2 and (IMV) less readableerr
to identify when a ValueError
is raised. This is generally the fastest and more readable than 1while val in iter[i:]
. Unsurprisingly, this does not scale wellwhile i < last
The overall performance differences between 1,2 and 4 are negligible, so it comes down to personal style and preference. Given that .index
uses ValueError
to let you know it didn't find anything, rather than eg returning None
, an EAFP-approach seems fitting to me.
Here are the 4 code variants and results from timeit
(in milliseconds) for different lengths of input and sparsity of matches
@version("WhileTrueBreak", versions)
def indices2(iter, val):
i = -1
while True:
try:
i = iter.index(val, i+1)
except ValueError:
break
else:
yield i
@version("WhileErrFalse", versions)
def indices5(iter, val):
i = -1
err = False
while not err:
try:
i = iter.index(val, i+1)
except ValueError:
err = True
else:
yield i
@version("RemainingSlice", versions)
def indices1(iter, val):
i = 0
while val in iter[i:]:
i = iter.index(val, i)
yield i
i += 1
@version("LastOccurrence", versions)
def indices4(iter,val):
i = 0
last = len(iter) - tuple(reversed(iter)).index(val)
while i < last:
i = iter.index(val, i)
yield i
i += 1
Length: 100, Ocurrences: 4.0%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 0.0074799987487494946, 'WhileErrFalse': 0.006440002471208572, 'RemainingSlice': 0.01221001148223877, 'LastOccurrence': 0.00801000278443098}
Length: 1000, Ocurrences: 1.2%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 0.03101000329479575, 'WhileErrFalse': 0.0278000021353364, 'RemainingSlice': 0.08278000168502331, 'LastOccurrence': 0.03986000083386898}
Length: 10000, Ocurrences: 2.05%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 0.18062000162899494, 'WhileErrFalse': 0.1810499932616949, 'RemainingSlice': 2.9145700042136014, 'LastOccurrence': 0.2049500006251037}
Length: 100000, Ocurrences: 1.977%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 1.9361200043931603, 'WhileErrFalse': 1.7280600033700466, 'RemainingSlice': 254.4725100044161, 'LastOccurrence': 1.9101499929092824}
Length: 100000, Ocurrences: 9.873%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 2.832529996521771, 'WhileErrFalse': 2.9984100023284554, 'RemainingSlice': 1132.4922299943864, 'LastOccurrence': 2.6660699979402125}
Length: 100000, Ocurrences: 25.058%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 5.119729996658862, 'WhileErrFalse': 5.2082200068980455, 'RemainingSlice': 2443.0577100021765, 'LastOccurrence': 4.75954000139609}
Length: 100000, Ocurrences: 49.698%
{'WhileTrueBreak': 9.372120001353323, 'WhileErrFalse': 8.447749994229525, 'RemainingSlice': 5042.717969999649, 'LastOccurrence': 8.050809998530895}
Here is a time performance comparison between using np.where
vs list_comprehension
. Seems like np.where
is faster on average.
# np.where
start_times = []
end_times = []
for i in range(10000):
start = time.time()
start_times.append(start)
temp_list = np.array([1,2,3,3,5])
ixs = np.where(temp_list==3)[0].tolist()
end = time.time()
end_times.append(end)
print("Took on average {} seconds".format(
np.mean(end_times)-np.mean(start_times)))
Took on average 3.81469726562e-06 seconds
# list_comprehension
start_times = []
end_times = []
for i in range(10000):
start = time.time()
start_times.append(start)
temp_list = np.array([1,2,3,3,5])
ixs = [i for i in range(len(temp_list)) if temp_list[i]==3]
end = time.time()
end_times.append(end)
print("Took on average {} seconds".format(
np.mean(end_times)-np.mean(start_times)))
Took on average 4.05311584473e-06 seconds
Edit (Idiotness):
Adding to the good answers.
def count(x, lst):
ind = []
for i in lst:
if i == x:
ind.append(lst.index(x))
return ind
The technical post webpages of this site follow the CC BY-SA 4.0 protocol. If you need to reprint, please indicate the site URL or the original address.Any question please contact:yoyou2525@163.com.