I want to toggle between two values in Python, that is, between 0 and 1.
For example, when I run a function the first time, it yields the number 0. Next time, it yields 1. Third time it's back to zero, and so on.
Sorry if this doesn't make sense, but does anyone know a way to do this?
Use itertools.cycle():
from itertools import cycle
myIterator = cycle(range(2))
myIterator.next() # or next(myIterator) which works in Python 3.x. Yields 0
myIterator.next() # or next(myIterator) which works in Python 3.x. Yields 1
# etc.
Note that if you need a more complicated cycle than [0, 1], this solution becomes much more attractive than the other ones posted here...
from itertools import cycle
mySmallSquareIterator = cycle(i*i for i in range(10))
# Will yield 0, 1, 4, 9, 16, 25, 36, 49, 64, 81, 0, 1, 4, ...
You can accomplish that with a generator like this:
>>> def alternate():
... while True:
... yield 0
... yield 1
...
>>>
>>> alternator = alternate()
>>>
>>> alternator.next()
0
>>> alternator.next()
1
>>> alternator.next()
0
You can use the mod (%) operator.
count = 0 # initialize count once
then
count = (count + 1) % 2
will toggle the value of count between 0 and 1 each time this statement is executed. The advantage of this approach is that you can cycle through a sequence of values (if needed) from 0 - (n-1) where n is the value you use with your % operator. And this technique does not depend on any Python specific features/libraries.
e.g.
count = 0
for i in range(5):
count = (count + 1) % 2
print(count)
gives:
1
0
1
0
1
You may find it useful to create a function alias like so:
import itertools
myfunc = itertools.cycle([0,1]).next
then
myfunc() # -> returns 0
myfunc() # -> returns 1
myfunc() # -> returns 0
myfunc() # -> returns 1
In python, True and False are integers (1 and 0 respectively). You could use a boolean (True or False) and the not operator:
var = not var
Of course, if you want to iterate between other numbers than 0 and 1, this trick becomes a little more difficult.
To pack this into an admittedly ugly function:
def alternate():
alternate.x=not alternate.x
return alternate.x
alternate.x=True #The first call to alternate will return False (0)
mylist=[5,3]
print(mylist[alternate()]) #5
print(mylist[alternate()]) #3
print(mylist[alternate()]) #5
from itertools import cycle
alternator = cycle((0,1))
next(alternator) # yields 0
next(alternator) # yields 1
next(alternator) # yields 0
next(alternator) # yields 1
#... forever
var = 1
var = 1 - var
That's the official tricky way of doing it ;)
Using xor works, and is a good visual way to toggle between two values.
count = 1
count = count ^ 1 # count is now 0
count = count ^ 1 # count is now 1
To toggle variable x between two arbitrary (integer) values,
e.g. a and b, use:
# start with either x == a or x == b
x = (a + b) - x
# case x == a:
# x = (a + b) - a ==> x becomes b
# case x == b:
# x = (a + b) - b ==> x becomes a
Example:
Toggle between 3 and 5
x = 3
x = 8 - x (now x == 5)
x = 8 - x (now x == 3)
x = 8 - x (now x == 5)
This works even with strings (sort of).
YesNo = 'YesNo'
answer = 'Yes'
answer = YesNo.replace(answer,'') (now answer == 'No')
answer = YesNo.replace(answer,'') (now answer == 'Yes')
answer = YesNo.replace(answer,'') (now answer == 'No')
Using the tuple subscript trick:
value = (1, 0)[value]
Using tuple subscripts is one good way to toggle between two values:
toggle_val = 1
toggle_val = (1,0)[toggle_val]
If you wrapped a function around this, you would have a nice alternating switch.
If a variable is previously defined and you want it to toggle between two values, you may use the
a if b else c form:
variable = 'value1'
variable = 'value2' if variable=='value1' else 'value1'
In addition, it works on Python 2.5+ and 3.x
See Expressions in the Python 3 documentation.
Simple and general solution without using any built-in. Just keep the track of current element and print/return the other one then change the current element status.
a, b = map(int, raw_input("Enter both number: ").split())
flag = input("Enter the first value: ")
length = input("Enter Number of iterations: ")
for i in range(length):
print flag
if flag == a:
flag = b;
else:
flag = a
Input:
3 835Output:38383
Means numbers to be toggled are 3 and 8
Second input, is the first value by which you want to start the sequence
And last input indicates the number of times you want to generate
One cool way you can do in any language:
variable = 0
variable = abs(variable - 1) // 1
variable = abs(variable - 1) // 0
Related
I know that you can avoid getting outputted, for example, 1e-10 using '{:.10f}'.format(1e-10), but I would adjust to take the decimal places as a variable (the 10f and e-10) depending on what the the value after e is...
I've used this code to find the value of decimal points needed
a = 6.789e-05
b = str(a)
if b[5] == 'e':
if b[7] == '0':
decimal_places = int(b[8])
else:
decimal_places = int(b[7]+b[8])
But I am struggling to figure out how I could no adjust the decimal places of the variable a using what I've found? As replacing '10f' with the decimal_places variable doesn't work... any help appreciated!
I've written a simple function to get number precission:
def precision(num):
n = str(num).split('e')
if len(n) == 1:
return 0
x = 0 if len(n[0].split('.')) == 1 else len(n[0].split('.')[1])
return x + abs(int(n[1]))
Then you can use string formatting to print your number to desired precission:
a = 6.789e-05
b = 6e-05
c = 3.5
d = 5
print('{num:.{precision}f}'.format(num=a, precision=precision(a))) # 0.00006789
print('{num:.{precision}f}'.format(num=b, precision=precision(b))) # 0.00006
print('{num:.{precision}f}'.format(num=c, precision=precision(c))) # 3.5
print('{num:.{precision}f}'.format(num=d, precision=precision(d))) # 5
I am trying to solve the usaco problem combination lock where you are given a two lock combinations. The locks have a margin of error of +- 2 so if you had a combination lock of 1-3-5, the combination 3-1-7 would still solve it.
You are also given a dial. For example, the dial starts at 1 and ends at the given number. So if the dial was 50, it would start at 1 and end at 50. Since the beginning of the dial is adjacent to the end of the dial, the combination 49-1-3 would also solve the combination lock of 1-3-5.
In this program, you have to output the number of distinct solutions to the two lock combinations. For the record, the combination 3-2-1 and 1-2-3 are considered distinct, but the combination 2-2-2 and 2-2-2 is not.
I have tried creating two functions, one to check whether three numbers match the constraints of the first combination lock and another to check whether three numbers match the constraints of the second combination lock.
a,b,c = 1,2,3
d,e,f = 5,6,7
dial = 50
def check(i,j,k):
i = (i+dial) % dial
j = (j+dial) % dial
k = (k+dial) % dial
if abs(a-i) <= 2 and abs(b-j) <= 2 and abs(c-k) <= 2:
return True
return False
def check1(i,j,k):
i = (i+dial) % dial
j = (j+dial) % dial
k = (k+dial) % dial
if abs(d-i) <= 2 and abs(e-j) <= 2 and abs(f-k) <= 2:
return True
return False
res = []
count = 0
for i in range(1,dial+1):
for j in range(1,dial+1):
for k in range(1,dial+1):
if check(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
if check1(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
print(sorted(res))
print(count)
The dial is 50 and the first combination is 1-2-3 and the second combination is 5-6-7.
The program should output 249 as the count, but it instead outputs 225. I am not really sure why this is happening. I have added the array for display purposes only. Any help would be greatly appreciated!
You're going to a lot of trouble to solve this by brute force.
First of all, your two check routines have identical functionality: just call the same routine for both combinations, giving the correct combination as a second set of parameters.
The critical logic problem is handling the dial wrap-around: you miss picking up the adjacent numbers. Run 49 through your check against a correct value of 1:
# using a=1, i=49
i = (1+50)%50 # i = 1
...
if abs(1-49) <= 2 ... # abs(1-49) is 48. You need it to show up as 2.
Instead, you can check each end of the dial:
a_diff = abs(i-a)
if a_diff <=2 or a_diff >= (dial-2) ...
Another way is to start by making a list of acceptable values:
a_vals = [(a-oops) % dial] for oops in range(-2, 3)]
... but note that you have to change the 0 value to dial. For instance, for a value of 1, you want a list of [49, 50, 1, 2, 3]
With this done, you can check like this:
if i in a_vals and j in b_vals and k in c_vals:
...
If you want to upgrade to the itertools package, you can simply generate all desired combinations:
combo = set(itertools.product(a_list, b_list_c_list) )
Do that for both given combinations and take the union of the two sets. The length of the union is the desired answer.
I see the follow-up isn't obvious -- at least, it's not appearing in the comments.
You have 5*5*5 solutions for each combination; start with 250 as your total.
Compute the sizes of the overlap sets: the numbers in each triple that can serve for each combination. For your given problem, those are [3],[4],[5]
The product of those set sizes is the quantity of overlap: 1*1*1 in this case.
The overlapping solutions got double-counted, so simply subtract the extra from 250, giving the answer of 249.
For example, given 1-2-3 and 49-6-6, you would get sets
{49, 50, 1}
{4}
{4, 5}
The sizes are 3, 1, 2; the product of those numbers is 6, so your answer is 250-6 = 244
Final note: If you're careful with your modular arithmetic, you can directly compute the set sizes without building the sets, making the program very short.
Here is one approach to a semi-brute-force solution:
import itertools
#The following code assumes 0-based combinations,
#represented as tuples of numbers in the range 0 to dial - 1.
#A simple wrapper function can be used to make the
#code apply to 1-based combos.
#The following function finds all combos which open lock with a given combo:
def combos(combo,tol,dial):
valids = []
for p in itertools.product(range(-tol,1+tol),repeat = 3):
valids.append(tuple((x+i)%dial for x,i in zip(combo,p)))
return valids
#The following finds all combos for a given iterable of target combos:
def all_combos(targets,tol,dial):
return set(combo for target in targets for combo in combos(target,tol,dial))
For example, len(all_combos([(0,1,2),(4,5,6)],2,50)) evaluate to 249.
The correct code for what you are trying to do is the following:
dial = 50
a = 1
b = 2
c = 3
d = 5
e = 6
f = 7
def check(i,j,k):
if (abs(a-i) <= 2 or (dial-abs(a-i)) <= 2) and \
(abs(b-j) <= 2 or (dial-abs(b-j)) <= 2) and \
(abs(c-k) <= 2 or (dial-abs(c-k)) <= 2):
return True
return False
def check1(i,j,k):
if (abs(d-i) <= 2 or (dial-abs(d-i)) <= 2) and \
(abs(e-j) <= 2 or (dial-abs(e-j)) <= 2) and \
(abs(f-k) <= 2 or (dial-abs(f-k)) <= 2):
return True
return False
res = []
count = 0
for i in range(1,dial+1):
for j in range(1,dial+1):
for k in range(1,dial+1):
if check(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
elif check1(i,j,k):
count += 1
res.append([i,j,k])
print(sorted(res))
print(count)
And the result is 249, the total combinations are 2*(5**3) = 250, but we have the duplicates: [3, 4, 5]
I am not sure of inverse is the proper name, but I think it is.
This example will clarify what I need:
I have a max height, 5 for example, and so height can range from 0 to 4. In this case we're talking integers, so the options are: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4.
What I need, given an input ranging from 0 up to (and including) 4, is to get the inverse number.
Example:
input: 3
output: 1
visual:
0 1 2 3 4
4 3 2 1 0
I know I can do it like this:
position_list = list(range(5))
index_list = position_list[::-1]
index = index_list[3]
But this will probably use unnecessary memory, and probably unnecessary cpu usage creating two lists. The lists will be deleted after these lines of code, and will recreated every time the code is ran (within method). I'd rather find a way not needing the lists at all.
What is an efficient way to achieve the same? (while still keeping the code readable for someone new to the code)
Isn't it just max - in...?
>>> MAX=4
>>> def calc(in_val):
... out_val = MAX - in_val
... print('%s -> %s' % ( in_val, out_val ))
...
>>> calc(3)
3 -> 1
>>> calc(1)
1 -> 3
You just need to subtract from the max:
def return_inverse(n, mx):
return mx - n
For the proposed example:
position_list = list(range(5))
mx = max(position_list)
[return_inverse(i, mx) for i in position_list]
# [4, 3, 2, 1, 0]
You have maximum heigth, let's call it max_h.
Your numbers are counted from 0, so they are in [0; max_h - 1]
You want to find the complementation number that becomes max_h in sum with input number
It is max_h - 1 - your_number:
max_height = 5
input_number = 2
for input_number in range(5):
print('IN:', input_number, 'OUT:', max_height - input_number - 1)
IN: 1 OUT: 3
IN: 2 OUT: 2
IN: 3 OUT: 1
IN: 4 OUT: 0
Simply compute the reverse index and then directly access the corresponding element.
n = 5
inp = 3
position_list = list(range(n))
position_list[n-1-inp]
# 1
You can just derive the index from the list's length and the desired position, to arrive at the "inverse":
position_list = list(range(5))
position = 3
inverse = position_list[len(position_list)-1-position]
And:
for i in position_list:
print(i, position_list[len(position_list)-1-i])
In this case, you can just have the output = 4-input. If it's just increments of 1 up to some number a simple operation like that should be enough. For example, if the max was 10 and the min was 5, then you could just do 9-input+5. The 9 can be replaced by the max-1 and the 5 can be replaced with the min.
So max-1-input+min
This is a two part question, I have to make a selection of 2 indexes via a random range of any number of integers in a list. Can't return both if they're both in the same range as well
Selection1 = random.randint(0,100)
Selection2 = random.randint(0,100)
For the sake of this argument, say:
Selection1 = 10
Selection2 = 17
And the list would be like so [25, 50, 75, 100]
Both would return the index of 0 because they fall between 0-25
So both would fall into the first index range, the problem is i'm having some issues trying to fit it into this range (IE: 0-25) which will return this first index (return list[0])
What is the syntax for this type of logic in python?
I'm sure I can figure out how to return different indexes if they fall in the same range, probably just loop reset to the loop but if I can get some advice on that it wouldn't hurt.
I'll give the code i'm working with right now as a guideline. Mostly at the bottom is where i'm struggling.
Code Here
def roulette_selection(decimal_list, chromosome_fitness, population):
percentages = []
for i in range(population):
result = decimal_list[i]/chromosome_fitness
result = result * 100
percentages.append(result)
print(percentages)
range_in_fitness = []
current_percent = 0
for i in range(population):
current_percent = percentages[i] + current_percent
range_in_fitness.append(current_percent)
parent1 = random.randint(0, 100)
parent2 = random.randint(0, 100)
for i in range(population):
if parent1 >= range_in_fitness[i] and parent1<=range_in_fitness[i+1]:
print(parent1, parent2)
print(range_in_fitness)
If your list of ranges is sorted, or it is acceptable to sort it, and is contiguous (no gaps), you can use Python's bisect module to do this in an efficient manner. Example:
>>> l = [25, 50, 75, 100]
>>> import bisect
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 10)
0
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 17)
0
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 55)
2
>>> bisect.bisect(l, 25)
1
Bisect returns the index of where the input number should fall into the list to maintain sort order. Note that this is a little confusing to think about at first; In the case of 55 above, it returns 2 because it should be inserted at index 2 as it falls between the current values at indices 1 and 2. If you give it a number exactly on a range boundary, it will 'fall to the right', as evidenced by the bisect(l,25) example.
The linked documentation includes a set of recipes for searching through sorted lists using bisect.
Given an input val and a list of range delimiters delims, here are two approaches:
# Both methods require range_delims to be sorted
range_delims = [25,50,75,100]
# Simple way
def find_range1(val, delims):
for i,d in enumerate(delims):
if val < d: return i
print find_range1(10, range_delims) # 0
print find_range1(17, range_delims) # 0
print find_range1(32, range_delims) # 1
print find_range1(64, range_delims) # 2
print find_range1(96, range_delims) # 3
print find_range1(101, range_delims) # None
# More explicit, possibly unnecessarily so
import math
def find_range2(val, delims):
lbl = [float('-inf')] + delims
ubl = delims + [float('inf')]
for (i,(lb,ub)) in enumerate(zip(lbl, ubl)):
if lb <= val < ub: return i
print find_range2(10, range_delims) # 0
print find_range2(17, range_delims) # 0
print find_range2(32, range_delims) # 1
print find_range2(64, range_delims) # 2
print find_range2(96, range_delims) # 3
print find_range2(101, range_delims) # 4
The first just compares val to the elements of delims and when it finds that val is less than the element, returns the index of that element.
The second is a little more verbose, generating both upper and lower bounds, and ensuring that val is between them. For interior elements of delims the bounds are list elements, for the 2 exterior elements of delims, the bounds are the element and either + or - infinity.
Note: Both approaches require the input list of delimiters to be sorted. There are ways to deal with different delimiter list formats, but it looks like you have a sorted list of delimiters (or could sort it without issue).
This tries to factorise, I have made the code in this way as I intend to change some features to allow for more functionality but what I want to know is why my results for xneg and xpos are both 0.
import math
sqrt = math.sqrt
equation = input("Enter the equation in the form x^2 + 5x + 6 : ")
x2coe = 0
xcoe = 0
ecoe = 0
counter = -1
rint = ''
for each in range(len(equation)+1):
if equation[each] == 'x':
break
x2coe = int(equation[each])
counter = counter + 1
for each in range(len(equation)):
if equation[each] == 'x':
break
xcoe = int(equation[counter + 5:counter + 6])
ecoe = int(equation[len(equation) - 1])
if x2coe == 0:
x2coe = 1
if xcoe == 0:
xcoe = 1
xpos = (-xcoe+sqrt((xcoe**2)-4*(x2coe*ecoe)))/(2*x2coe)
xneg = (-xcoe-sqrt((xcoe**2)-4*(x2coe*ecoe)))/(2*x2coe)
print("Possible Solutions")
print("-----------------------------------------------")
print("X = {0}".format(xpos))
print("X = {0}".format(xneg))
print("-----------------------------------------------")
It's because your x2coe and xcoe variables are both 0 when you reach the computations for xpos and xneg. You would have received a division by zero, except for what looks like another problem. The xpos & xneg expressions look like the quadratic formula, but you are dividing by 2 and then multiplying by x2coe at the end. Multiplication and division have equal precedence and group from left to right, so you need to use one of:
xpos = (-xcoe+sqrt((xcoe**2)-4*(x2coe*ecoe)))/(2*x2coe) # one way to fix
xneg = (-xcoe-sqrt((xcoe**2)-4*(x2coe*ecoe)))/2/x2coe # another, slower way
I suggest that you get the "business" logic of your program debugged first, and just input the three coefficients as a tuple or list.
x2coe, xcoe, ecoe = eval(input("Enter coefficients of ax^2+bx+c as a,b,c: "))
When your factoring code gives the results you want, then go back and put in a fancy input handler.
Hint: import re. Regular expressions are a good tool for simple parsing like this. (You'll need something even fancier if you want to handle parentheses/brackets/braces some day.) Take a look at the how-to document at http://docs.python.org/3.3/howto/regex.html first, and also bookmark the re module documentation at http://docs.python.org/3.3/library/re.html
The problem is probably that you're hard-coding how long you think each coefficient should be: 1 digit. You should use another function that would make it more flexible. Any of the coefficients could be blank, in which case A or B should be assumed to be 1 and C should be assumed to be 0.
Hopefully this will help:
p = re.compile('\s*(\d*)\s*x\^2\s*\+\s*(\d*)\s*x\s*\+\s*(\d*)\s*')
A, B, C = p.match(equation).group(1, 2, 3)
print(A, B, C)
All of the instances of \s* are to allow for flexibility in input, so spaces don't kill you.