为了实现这个问题，我们可以使用多种不同的方法来解决它，这两种是常见的解决方案，但在实际场景中实现它们时，我们还必须考虑时间复杂性。

import random
import time

dupl_list = [random.randint(1,1000) for x in range(500)]
print("List with duplicate integers")
print (dupl_list)


#Method 1 
print("******************Method 1 *************")

def Repeat_num(x):
    _size = len(x)
    repeated = []
    for i in range(_size):
        # print(i)
        k = i + 1
        for j in range(k, _size):
            # print(j)
            if x[i] == x[j] and x[i] not in repeated:
                repeated.append(x[i])
    return repeated

start = time.time()
print(Repeat_num(dupl_list))
end = time.time()
print("The time of execution of above program is :",(end-start) * 10**3, "ms")

print("***************Method 2****************")

#method 2 - using count()
def repeast_count(dup_list):
  new = []
  for a in dup_list:
      # print(a)
      # checking the occurrence of elements
      n = dup_list.count(a)
      # if the occurrence is more than
      # one we add it to the output list
      if n > 1:
          if new.count(a) == 0:  # condition to check
              new.append(a)
  return new


start = time.time()
print(repeast_count(dupl_list))
end = time.time()
print("The time of execution of above program is :",(end-start) * 10**3, "ms")

# #输出示例:

List with duplicate integers
[5, 45, 28, 81, 32, 98, 8, 83, 47, 95, 41, 49, 4, 1, 85, 26, 38, 82, 54, 11]
******************Method 1 *************
[]
The time of execution of above program is : 1.1069774627685547 ms
***************Method 2****************
[]
The time of execution of above program is : 0.1881122589111328 ms

对于一般的理解，方法1是好的，但是对于真正的实现，我更喜欢方法2，因为它比方法1花费的时间更少。

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])

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

raw_list = [1,2,3,3,4,5,6,6,7,2,3,4,2,3,4,1,3,4,]

clean_list = list(set(raw_list))
duplicated_items = []

for item in raw_list:
    try:
        clean_list.remove(item)
    except ValueError:
        duplicated_items.append(item)


print(duplicated_items)
# [3, 6, 2, 3, 4, 2, 3, 4, 1, 3, 4]

基本上可以通过转换为set (clean_list)来删除重复项，然后迭代raw_list，同时删除出现在raw_list中的clean列表中的每个项。如果item未找到，则捕获引发的ValueError异常，并将该item添加到duplicated_items列表中。

如果需要重复项的索引，只需枚举列表并使用索引即可。(对于index, item in enumerate(raw_list):)，对于大型列表(比如上千+的元素)来说，这是更快和优化的

我们可以使用itertools。Groupby，以便找到所有有dup的项:

from itertools import groupby

myList  = [2, 4, 6, 8, 4, 6, 12]
# when the list is sorted, groupby groups by consecutive elements which are similar
for x, y in groupby(sorted(myList)):
    #  list(y) returns all the occurences of item x
    if len(list(y)) > 1:
        print x  

输出将是:

4
6

有点晚了，但可能对一些人有帮助。 对于一个比较大的列表，我发现这个方法很适合我。

l=[1,2,3,5,4,1,3,1]
s=set(l)
d=[]
for x in l:
    if x in s:
        s.remove(x)
    else:
        d.append(x)
d
[1,3,1]

显示正确和所有重复，并保持秩序。