试试这个检查副本

>>> def checkDuplicate(List):
    duplicate={}
    for i in List:
            ## checking whether the item is already present in dictionary or not
            ## increasing count if present
            ## initializing count to 1 if not present

        duplicate[i]=duplicate.get(i,0)+1

    return [k for k,v in duplicate.items() if v>1]

>>> checkDuplicate([1,2,3,"s",1,2,3])
[1, 2, 3]

你不需要计数，只需要该物品之前是否被看到过。把这个答案用在这个问题上:

def list_duplicates(seq):
  seen = set()
  seen_add = seen.add
  # adds all elements it doesn't know yet to seen and all other to seen_twice
  seen_twice = set( x for x in seq if x in seen or seen_add(x) )
  # turn the set into a list (as requested)
  return list( seen_twice )

a = [1,2,3,2,1,5,6,5,5,5]
list_duplicates(a) # yields [1, 2, 5]

以防速度很重要，这里有一些时间安排:

# file: test.py
import collections

def thg435(l):
    return [x for x, y in collections.Counter(l).items() if y > 1]

def moooeeeep(l):
    seen = set()
    seen_add = seen.add
    # adds all elements it doesn't know yet to seen and all other to seen_twice
    seen_twice = set( x for x in l if x in seen or seen_add(x) )
    # turn the set into a list (as requested)
    return list( seen_twice )

def RiteshKumar(l):
    return list(set([x for x in l if l.count(x) > 1]))

def JohnLaRooy(L):
    seen = set()
    seen2 = set()
    seen_add = seen.add
    seen2_add = seen2.add
    for item in L:
        if item in seen:
            seen2_add(item)
        else:
            seen_add(item)
    return list(seen2)

l = [1,2,3,2,1,5,6,5,5,5]*100

以下是结果:(做得好@JohnLaRooy!)

$ python -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.JohnLaRooy(test.l)'
10000 loops, best of 3: 74.6 usec per loop
$ python -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.moooeeeep(test.l)'
10000 loops, best of 3: 91.3 usec per loop
$ python -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.thg435(test.l)'
1000 loops, best of 3: 266 usec per loop
$ python -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.RiteshKumar(test.l)'
100 loops, best of 3: 8.35 msec per loop

有趣的是，除了计时本身，当使用pypy时，排名也略有变化。最有趣的是，基于counter的方法极大地受益于pypy的优化，而我建议的方法缓存方法似乎几乎没有任何效果。

$ pypy -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.JohnLaRooy(test.l)'
100000 loops, best of 3: 17.8 usec per loop
$ pypy -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.thg435(test.l)'
10000 loops, best of 3: 23 usec per loop
$ pypy -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.moooeeeep(test.l)'
10000 loops, best of 3: 39.3 usec per loop

显然，这种效应与输入数据的“重复性”有关。我设置了l = [random.randrange(1000000) for I in xrange(10000)]，得到了这些结果:

$ pypy -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.moooeeeep(test.l)'
1000 loops, best of 3: 495 usec per loop
$ pypy -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.JohnLaRooy(test.l)'
1000 loops, best of 3: 499 usec per loop
$ pypy -mtimeit -s 'import test' 'test.thg435(test.l)'
1000 loops, best of 3: 1.68 msec per loop

这里有一个简洁明了的解决方案——

for x in set(li):
    li.remove(x)

li = list(set(li))

一个非常简单的解决方案，但是复杂度是O(n*n)。

>>> xs = [1,2,3,4,4,5,5,6,1]
>>> set([x for x in xs if xs.count(x) > 1])
set([1, 4, 5])

不需要转换为列表，可能最简单的方法是如下所示。 在面试中，当他们要求不要使用集合时，这可能会很有用

a=[1,2,3,3,3]
dup=[]
for each in a:
  if each not in dup:
    dup.append(each)
print(dup)

======= else获取唯一值和重复值的2个单独列表

a=[1,2,3,3,3]
uniques=[]
dups=[]

for each in a:
  if each not in uniques:
    uniques.append(each)
  else:
    dups.append(each)
print("Unique values are below:")
print(uniques)
print("Duplicate values are below:")
print(dups)

some_list = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'b', 'd', 'm', 'n', 'n']
some_dictionary = {}

for element in some_list:
    if element not in some_dictionary:
       some_dictionary[element] = 1
    else:
        some_dictionary[element] += 1

for key, value in some_dictionary.items():
    if value > 1:
       print(key, end = ' ')

# another way
duplicates = []

for x in some_list:
    if some_list.count(x) > 1 and x not in duplicates:
        duplicates.append(x)

print()
print(duplicates)

来源:这里