significance of using print() in python - python

What is the difference between using print() and not using it.
For example, say a = ("first", "second", "third'), what is the difference between
print (a[0] a[2])
and
a[0] a[2]
?

>>> s = 'foo'
>>> s
'foo'
>>> print s
foo
When you type any expression into the Python interpreter, if said expression returns a value, the interpreter will output that value's representation, or repr. reprs are primarily used for debugging, and are intended to show the value in a way that is useful for the programmer. A typical example of a value's repr is how repr('foo') would output 'foo'.
When you use print, you aren't returning a value and so the interpreter is not actually outputting anything; instead, print is writing the value's str to sys.stdout (or an alternative stream, if you specify it with the >> syntax, e.g. print >>sys.stderr, x). strs are intended for general output, not just programmer use, though they may be the same as repr. A typical example of a value's str is how str('foo') would output foo.
The difference between what the interpreter does and what print comes more into play when you write modules or scripts. print statements will continue to produce output, while expression values are not output unless you do so explicitly. You can still output a value's repr, though: print repr(value)
You can also control str and repr in your own objects:
>>> class MyThing(object):
... def __init__(self, value):
... self.value = value
... def __str__(self):
... return str(self.value)
... def __repr__(self):
... return '<MyThing value=' + repr(self.value) + '>'
...
>>> mything = MyThing('foo')
>>> mything
<MyThing value='foo'>
>>> print mything
foo

In interactive mode, the difference is negligible, as the other answers indicate.
However, in a script, print a[0] will actually print output to the screen, while just a[0] will return the value, but that has no visible effect.
For example, consider the following script, printtest.py:
myList = ["first", "second", "third"]
print "with print:", myList[0], myList[2]
"without print:", myList[0], myList[2]
If you run this script in a terminal (python printtest.py), the output is:
with print: first third

>>> a=("first","second")
>>> print a[0],a[1]
first second
>>> a[0],a[1]
('first', 'second')

you can do this
>>> print (a[0], a[2], a[3])
('first', 'second', 'third')
try it :)

print() and not using it?
print prints value (What I mean is in following example, read comets I added):
>>> print a[1]
second # prints without '
>>> a[1]
'second' # prints with '
more useful:
print:
>>> print "a\nb"
a # print value
b
but interpreter
>>> "a\na" # raw strings
'a\na'
that is raw:
>>> print repr("a\na")
'a\na'
difference: print (a[0] a[2]) and a[0] a[2]?
This print two elements of a tuple. as below
>>> print a[0], a[2]
first third
this is similar to print two strings like below:
>>> print "one", "two"
one two
[second]
Where as this first create a tuple (a[0], a[2]) then that will be printed
>>> print (a[0], a[2])
('first', 'third')
first make a tuple of 2 strings then print that like below:
>>> print ("one", "two")
('one', 'two')
Additionally, if you add , then it makes a tuple:
simple string
>>> a[0]
'first'
and this is tuple:
>>> a[0],
('first',)
similarly,
>>> a[0], a[1]
('first', 'second')

Related

Python convert list of one element into string with bracket

How to convert python list containing one element to string with bracket?
For more than one element, its easy for me to just just use tuple(list['a','b']) which returns as tuple ('a','b') but if element is one, it returns as ('a',) but rather I want to return ('a')
sample:
mylist = ["a", " b"]
print tuple([s.strip() for s in mylist])
>> ('a', 'b')
mylist = ["a"]
print tuple([s.strip() for s in mylist])
>> ('a', ) #rather I want to return ('a')
Avoid relying on default __repr__() method, to format strings, they might change.
Be explicit about your intent instead
print "('" + "', '".join(mylist) + "')"
>>> ('a') == 'a'
True
If you're not going to use a single element tuple, then the parenthesis are only grouping parenthesis (not a container), and they won't stick like you want them to, except you include them as part of the string with a or define a custom print function.
With the custom print function, you get to keep the conversion from list to tuple (i.e. t = tuple(mylist)) as is and also use the single element tuple as is:
def tuple_print(t):
print(str(t).replace(',', '') if len(t) == 1 else t)
Trials:
>>> def tuple_print(t):
... print(str(t).replace(',', '') if len(t) == 1 else t)
...
>>> mylist = ["a"]
>>> t = tuple(mylist)
>>> t
('a',)
>>> tuple_print(t)
('a')
>>> t = ('a', 'b')
>>> tuple_print(t)
('a', 'b')

Replace one python object with another everywhere

How do I replace a python object everywhere with another object?
I have two classes, SimpleObject and FancyObject. I've created a SimpleObject, and have several references to it. Now I'd like to create a FancyObject, and make all those references point to the new object.
a = SimpleObject()
some_list.append(a)
b = FancyObject()
a = b is not what I want, it just changes what a points to. I read the following would work, but doesn't. I get an error "Attribute __dict__ is not writable":
a.__dict__ = b.__dict__
What I want is the equivalent of (pseudo-C):
*a = *b
I know this is hacky, but is there any way to accomplish this?
There's no way. It'd let you mutate immutable objects and cause all sorts of nastiness.
x = 1
y = (x,)
z = {x: 3}
magic_replace(x, [1])
# x is now a list!
# The contents of y have changed, and z now has an unhashable key.
x = 1 + 1
# Is x 2, or [1, 1], or something stranger?
You can put that object in global namespace of separate module and than monkey patch it when you need.
objstore.py:
replaceable = object()
sample.py:
import objstore
b = object()
def isB():
return objstore.replaceable is b
if __name__ == '__main__':
print isB()#False
objstore.replaceable = b
print isB()#True
P.S. Rely on monkey patching is a symptom of bad design
PyJack has a function replace_all_refs that replaces all references to an object in memory.
An example from the docs:
>>> item = (100, 'one hundred')
>>> data = {item: True, 'itemdata': item}
>>>
>>> class Foobar(object):
... the_item = item
...
>>> def outer(datum):
... def inner():
... return ("Here is the datum:", datum,)
...
... return inner
...
>>> inner = outer(item)
>>>
>>> print item
(100, 'one hundred')
>>> print data
{'itemdata': (100, 'one hundred'), (100, 'one hundred'): True}
>>> print Foobar.the_item
(100, 'one hundred')
>>> print inner()
('Here is the datum:', (100, 'one hundred'))
Calling replace_all_refs
>>> new = (101, 'one hundred and one')
>>> org_item = pyjack.replace_all_refs(item, new)
>>>
>>> print item
(101, 'one hundred and one')
>>> print data
{'itemdata': (101, 'one hundred and one'), (101, 'one hundred and one'): True}
>>> print Foobar.the_item
(101, 'one hundred and one')
>>> print inner()
('Here is the datum:', (101, 'one hundred and one'))
You have a number of options:
Design this in from the beginning, using the Facade pattern (i.e. every object in your main code is a proxy for something else), or a single mutable container (i.e. every variable holds a list; you can change the contents of the list through any such reference). Advantages are that it works with the execution machinery of the language, and is relatively easily discoverable from the affected code. Downside: more code.
Always refer to the same single variable. This is one implementation of the above. Clean, nothing fancy, clear in code. I would recommend this by far.
Use the debug, gc, and introspection features to hunt down every object meeting your criterion and alter the variables while running. The disadvantage is that the value of variables will change during code execution, without it being discoverable from the affected code. Even if the change is atomic (eliminating a class of errors), because this can change the type of a variable after the execution of code which determined the value was of a different type, introduces errors which cannot reasonably be anticipated in that code. For example
a = iter(b) # will blow up if not iterable
[x for x in b] # before change, was iterable, but between two lines, b was changed to an int.
More subtly, when discriminating between string and non-string sequences (because the defining feature of strings is that iterating them also yields strings, which are themselves iterable), when flattening a structure, code may be broken.
Another answer mentions pyjack which implements option 3. Although it may work, it has all of the problems mentioned. This is likely to be appropriate only in debugging and development.
Take advantage of mutable objects such as a list.
a = [SimpleObject()]
some_list.append(a)
b = FancyObject()
a[0] = b
Proof that this works:
class SimpleObject():
def Who(self):
print 'SimpleObject'
class FancyObject():
def Who(self):
print 'FancyObject'
>>> a = [SimpleObject()]
>>> a[0].Who()
SimpleObject
>>> some_list = []
>>> some_list.append(a)
>>> some_list[0][0].Who()
SimpleObject
>>> b = FancyObject()
>>> b.Who()
FancyObject
>>> a[0] = b
>>> some_list[0][0].Who()
FancyObject

python convert unicode to string

I got my results from sqlite by python, it's like this kind of tuples: (u'PR:000017512',)
However, I wanna print it as 'PR:000017512'. At first, I tried to select the first one in tuple by using index [0]. But the print out results is still u'PR:000017512'. Then I used str() to convert and nothing changed. How can I print this without u''?
You're confusing the string representation with its value. When you print a unicode string the u doesn't get printed:
>>> foo=u'abc'
>>> foo
u'abc'
>>> print foo
abc
Update:
Since you're dealing with a tuple, you don't get off this easy: You have to print the members of the tuple:
>>> foo=(u'abc',)
>>> print foo
(u'abc',)
>>> # If the tuple really only has one member, you can just subscript it:
>>> print foo[0]
abc
>>> # Join is a more realistic approach when dealing with iterables:
>>> print '\n'.join(foo)
abc
Don't see the problem:
>>> x = (u'PR:000017512',)
>>> print x
(u'PR:000017512',)
>>> print x[0]
PR:000017512
>>>
You the string is in unicode format, but it still means PR:000017512
Check out the docs on String literals
http://docs.python.org/2/reference/lexical_analysis.html#string-literals
In [22]: unicode('foo').encode('ascii','replace')
Out[22]: 'foo'

How to properly convert list of one element to a tuple with one element

>>> list=['Hello']
>>> tuple(list)
('Hello',)
Why is the result of the above statements ('Hello',) and not ('Hello')?. I would have expected it to be the later.
You've got it right. In python if you do:
a = ("hello")
a will be a string since the parenthesis in this context are used for grouping things together. It is actually the comma which makes a tuple, not the parenthesis (parenthesis are just needed to avoid ambiguity in certain situations like function calls)...
a = "Hello","goodbye" #Look Ma! No Parenthesis!
print (type(a)) #<type 'tuple'>
a = ("Hello")
print (type(a)) #<type 'str'>
a = ("Hello",)
print (type(a)) #<type 'tuple'>
a = "Hello",
print (type(a)) #<type 'tuple'>
And finally (and most direct for your question):
>>> a = ['Hello']
>>> b = tuple(a)
>>> print (type(b)) #<type 'tuple'> -- It thinks it is a tuple
>>> print (b[0]) #'Hello' -- It acts like a tuple too -- Must be :)

Printing tuple with string formatting in Python

So, i have this problem.
I got tuple (1,2,3) which i should print with string formatting.
eg.
tup = (1,2,3)
print "this is a tuple %something" % (tup)
and this should print tuple representation with brackets, like
This is a tuple (1,2,3)
But I get TypeError: not all arguments converted during string formatting instead.
How in the world am I able to do this? Kinda lost here so if you guys could point me to a right direction :)
>>> # Python 2
>>> thetuple = (1, 2, 3)
>>> print "this is a tuple: %s" % (thetuple,)
this is a tuple: (1, 2, 3)
>>> # Python 3
>>> thetuple = (1, 2, 3)
>>> print(f"this is a tuple: %s" % (thetuple,))
this is a tuple: (1, 2, 3)
Making a singleton tuple with the tuple of interest as the only item, i.e. the (thetuple,) part, is the key bit here.
Note that the % syntax is obsolete. Use str.format, which is simpler and more readable:
t = 1,2,3
print 'This is a tuple {0}'.format(t)
Many answers given above were correct. The right way to do it is:
>>> thetuple = (1, 2, 3)
>>> print "this is a tuple: %s" % (thetuple,)
this is a tuple: (1, 2, 3)
However, there was a dispute over if the '%' String operator is obsolete. As many have pointed out, it is definitely not obsolete, as the '%' String operator is easier to combine a String statement with a list data.
Example:
>>> tup = (1,2,3)
>>> print "First: %d, Second: %d, Third: %d" % tup
First: 1, Second: 2, Third: 3
However, using the .format() function, you will end up with a verbose statement.
Example:
>>> tup = (1,2,3)
>>> print "First: %d, Second: %d, Third: %d" % tup
>>> print 'First: {}, Second: {}, Third: {}'.format(1,2,3)
>>> print 'First: {0[0]}, Second: {0[1]}, Third: {0[2]}'.format(tup)
First: 1, Second: 2, Third: 3
First: 1, Second: 2, Third: 3
First: 1, Second: 2, Third: 3
Further more, '%' string operator also useful for us to validate the data type such as %s, %d, %i, while .format() only support two conversion flags: '!s' and '!r'.
>>> tup = (1, 2, 3)
>>> print "Here it is: %s" % (tup,)
Here it is: (1, 2, 3)
>>>
Note that (tup,) is a tuple containing a tuple. The outer tuple is the argument to the % operator. The inner tuple is its content, which is actually printed.
(tup) is an expression in brackets, which when evaluated results in tup.
(tup,) with the trailing comma is a tuple, which contains tup as is only member.
Even though this question is quite old and has many different answers, I'd still like to add the imho most "pythonic" and also readable/concise answer.
Since the general tuple printing method is already shown correctly by Antimony, this is an addition for printing each element in a tuple separately, as Fong Kah Chun has shown correctly with the %s syntax.
Interestingly it has been only mentioned in a comment, but using an asterisk operator to unpack the tuple yields full flexibility and readability using the str.format method when printing tuple elements separately.
tup = (1, 2, 3)
print('Element(s) of the tuple: One {0}, two {1}, three {2}'.format(*tup))
This also avoids printing a trailing comma when printing a single-element tuple, as circumvented by Jacob CUI with replace. (Even though imho the trailing comma representation is correct if wanting to preserve the type representation when printing):
tup = (1, )
print('Element(s) of the tuple: One {0}'.format(*tup))
This doesn't use string formatting, but you should be able to do:
print 'this is a tuple ', (1, 2, 3)
If you really want to use string formatting:
print 'this is a tuple %s' % str((1, 2, 3))
# or
print 'this is a tuple %s' % ((1, 2, 3),)
Note, this assumes you are using a Python version earlier than 3.0.
t = (1, 2, 3)
# the comma (,) concatenates the strings and adds a space
print "this is a tuple", (t)
# format is the most flexible way to do string formatting
print "this is a tuple {0}".format(t)
# classic string formatting
# I use it only when working with older Python versions
print "this is a tuple %s" % repr(t)
print "this is a tuple %s" % str(t)
Besides the methods proposed in the other answers, since Python 3.6 you can also use Literal String Interpolation (f-strings):
>>> tup = (1,2,3)
>>> print(f'this is a tuple {tup}')
this is a tuple (1, 2, 3)
I think the best way to do this is:
t = (1,2,3)
print "This is a tuple: %s" % str(t)
If you're familiar with printf style formatting, then Python supports its own version. In Python, this is done using the "%" operator applied to strings (an overload of the modulo operator), which takes any string and applies printf-style formatting to it.
In our case, we are telling it to print "This is a tuple: ", and then adding a string "%s", and for the actual string, we're passing in a string representation of the tuple (by calling str(t)).
If you're not familiar with printf style formatting, I highly suggest learning, since it's very standard. Most languages support it in one way or another.
Please note a trailing comma will be added if the tuple only has one item. e.g:
t = (1,)
print 'this is a tuple {}'.format(t)
and you'll get:
'this is a tuple (1,)'
in some cases e.g. you want to get a quoted list to be used in mysql query string like
SELECT name FROM students WHERE name IN ('Tom', 'Jerry');
you need to consider to remove the tailing comma use replace(',)', ')') after formatting because it's possible that the tuple has only 1 item like ('Tom',), so the tailing comma needs to be removed:
query_string = 'SELECT name FROM students WHERE name IN {}'.format(t).replace(',)', ')')
Please suggest if you have decent way of removing this comma in the output.
For python 3
tup = (1,2,3)
print("this is a tuple %s" % str(tup))
Try this to get an answer:
>>>d = ('1', '2')
>>> print("Value: %s" %(d))
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: not all arguments converted during string formatting
If we put only-one tuple inside (), it makes a tuple itself:
>>> (d)
('1', '2')
This means the above print statement will look like:
print("Value: %s" %('1', '2')) which is an error!
Hence:
>>> (d,)
(('1', '2'),)
>>>
Above will be fed correctly to the print's arguments.
You can try this one as well;
tup = (1,2,3)
print("this is a tuple {something}".format(something=tup))
You can't use %something with (tup) just because of packing and unpacking concept with tuple.
Using f-string for a quick print in python3.
tup = (1,2,3)
print(f"this is a tuple {tup}")
how much changed over the years. Now you can do this:
tup = (1,2,3)
print(f'This is a Tuple {tup}.')
Results in: This is a Tuple (1,2,3).
Talk is cheap, show you the code:
>>> tup = (10, 20, 30)
>>> i = 50
>>> print '%d %s'%(i,tup)
50 (10, 20, 30)
>>> print '%s'%(tup,)
(10, 20, 30)
>>>

Categories