重复 / 深度更新 a dict

def deepupdate(original, update):
    """
    Recursively update a dict.
    Subdict's won't be overwritten but also updated.
    """
    for key, value in original.iteritems(): 
        if key not in update:
            update[key] = value
        elif isinstance(value, dict):
            deepupdate(value, update[key]) 
    return update

示威:

pluto_original = {
    'name': 'Pluto',
    'details': {
        'tail': True,
        'color': 'orange'
    }
}

pluto_update = {
    'name': 'Pluutoo',
    'details': {
        'color': 'blue'
    }
}

print deepupdate(pluto_original, pluto_update)

结果:

{
    'name': 'Pluutoo',
    'details': {
        'color': 'blue',
        'tail': True
    }
}

谢谢Radnaw的编辑。

在Python 3.8发布时,将有一个新的选项(计划于2019年10月20日),感谢PEP 572:分配表达式。 新的分配表达式操作员:= 允许您分配副本的结果,并且仍然使用它来呼叫更新,留下组合代码一个单一表达式,而不是两个陈述,改变:

newdict = dict1.copy()
newdict.update(dict2)

到:

(newdict := dict1.copy()).update(dict2)

(newdict := dict1.copy()).update(dict2) or newdict

newdict = {**dict1, **dict2}

脱包方法更清晰(对于任何人都知道一般的脱包,首先,你应该),不需要一个名字的结果(因此,它是更紧密的,当构建一个暂时的,即时转移到一个功能或包含在一个名单 / 双字或类似),并且几乎肯定更快,也是(在CPython上)相当于:

newdict = {}
newdict.update(dict1)
newdict.update(dict2)

它也更可扩展,因为结合三个法则是显而易见的:

 newdict = {**dict1, **dict2, **dict3}

 (newdict := dict1.copy()).update(dict2), newdict.update(dict3)

或沒有暫時的九個,但以真實的測試,每個九個結果:

 (newdict := dict1.copy()).update(dict2) or newdict.update(dict3)

z = MergeDict(x, y)

当使用这个新对象时,它将像合并词典一样行事,但它将有持续的创作时间和持续的记忆脚印,同时让原始词典无触摸。

当然,如果你使用结果很多,那么你会在某个时候达到创建一个真正的合并词典会是最快的解决方案的界限。

a = { 'x': 3, 'y': 4 }
b = MergeDict(a)  # we merge just one dict
b['x'] = 5
print b  # will print {'x': 5, 'y': 4}
print a  # will print {'y': 4, 'x': 3}

class MergeDict(object):
  def __init__(self, *originals):
    self.originals = ({},) + originals[::-1]  # reversed

  def __getitem__(self, key):
    for original in self.originals:
      try:
        return original[key]
      except KeyError:
        pass
    raise KeyError(key)

  def __setitem__(self, key, value):
    self.originals[0][key] = value

  def __iter__(self):
    return iter(self.keys())

  def __repr__(self):
    return '%s(%s)' % (
      self.__class__.__name__,
      ', '.join(repr(original)
          for original in reversed(self.originals)))

  def __str__(self):
    return '{%s}' % ', '.join(
        '%r: %r' % i for i in self.iteritems())

  def iteritems(self):
    found = set()
    for original in self.originals:
      for k, v in original.iteritems():
        if k not in found:
          yield k, v
          found.add(k)

  def items(self):
    return list(self.iteritems())

  def keys(self):
    return list(k for k, _ in self.iteritems())

  def values(self):
    return list(v for _, v in self.iteritems())

深深的定律:

from typing import List, Dict
from copy import deepcopy

def merge_dicts(*from_dicts: List[Dict], no_copy: bool=False) -> Dict :
    """ no recursion deep merge of two dicts

    By default creates fresh Dict and merges all to it.

    no_copy = True, will merge all dicts to a fist one in a list without copy.
    Why? Sometime I need to combine one dictionary from "layers".
    The "layers" are not in use and dropped immediately after merging.
    """

    if no_copy:
        xerox = lambda x:x
    else:
        xerox = deepcopy

    result = xerox(from_dicts[0])

    for _from in from_dicts[1:]:
        merge_queue = [(result, _from)]
        for _to, _from in merge_queue:
            for k, v in _from.items():
                if k in _to and isinstance(_to[k], dict) and isinstance(v, dict):
                    # key collision add both are dicts.
                    # add to merging queue
                    merge_queue.append((_to[k], v))
                    continue
                _to[k] = xerox(v)

    return result

使用:

print("=============================")
print("merge all dicts to first one without copy.")
a0 = {"a":{"b":1}}
a1 = {"a":{"c":{"d":4}}}
a2 = {"a":{"c":{"f":5}, "d": 6}}
print(f"a0 id[{id(a0)}] value:{a0}")
print(f"a1 id[{id(a1)}] value:{a1}")
print(f"a2 id[{id(a2)}] value:{a2}")
r = merge_dicts(a0, a1, a2, no_copy=True)
print(f"r  id[{id(r)}] value:{r}")

print("=============================")
print("create fresh copy of all")
a0 = {"a":{"b":1}}
a1 = {"a":{"c":{"d":4}}}
a2 = {"a":{"c":{"f":5}, "d": 6}}
print(f"a0 id[{id(a0)}] value:{a0}")
print(f"a1 id[{id(a1)}] value:{a1}")
print(f"a2 id[{id(a2)}] value:{a2}")
r = merge_dicts(a0, a1, a2)
print(f"r  id[{id(r)}] value:{r}")

最好的版本我可以想象,而不使用复制将是:

from itertools import chain
x = {'a':1, 'b': 2}
y = {'b':10, 'c': 11}
dict(chain(x.iteritems(), y.iteritems()))

它比 dict(x.items() + y.items()) 更快,但不像 n = copy(a); n.update(b),至少在 CPython 上。

我个人最喜欢这个版本,因为它在一个单一的功能合成中描述了我想要的东西相当好,唯一的小问题是,它并不完全显而易见,Y的值超过X的值,但我不认为很难找到它。

另一个,更细致的选择:

z = dict(x, **y)

注意:这已成为一个受欢迎的答案,但重要的是要指出的是,如果 y 有任何不紧密的密钥,事实上,这完全是CPython实施细节的滥用,并且它不在Python 3或PyPy,IronPython,或Jython工作。