使用new_list=my_list时,对new_list的任何修改都会每次更改my_list。为什么会出现这种情况,以及如何克隆或复制列表以防止出现这种情况?


当前回答

让我惊讶的是,这还没有被提及,所以为了完整起见。。。

您可以使用“splat operator”:*执行列表解包,这也将复制列表的元素。

old_list = [1, 2, 3]

new_list = [*old_list]

new_list.append(4)
old_list == [1, 2, 3]
new_list == [1, 2, 3, 4]

这种方法的明显缺点是它仅在Python 3.5+中可用。

尽管从时间上看,这似乎比其他常用方法表现得更好。

x = [random.random() for _ in range(1000)]

%timeit a = list(x)
%timeit a = x.copy()
%timeit a = x[:]

%timeit a = [*x]

#: 2.47 µs ± 38.1 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100000 loops each)
#: 2.47 µs ± 54.6 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100000 loops each)
#: 2.39 µs ± 58.2 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100000 loops each)

#: 2.22 µs ± 43.2 ns per loop (mean ± std. dev. of 7 runs, 100000 loops each)

其他回答

菲利克斯已经给出了一个很好的答案,但我想我应该对各种方法进行速度比较:

10.59秒(105.9µs/itn)-copy.depcopy(旧列表)10.16秒(101.6µs/itn)-纯Python Copy()方法使用deepcopy复制类1.488秒(14.88µs/itn)-纯Python Copy()方法不复制类(仅dicts/lists/tuples)0.325秒(3.25µs/itn)-对于old_list:new_list.append(项目)中的项目0.217秒(2.17µs/itn)-[i代表old_list](列表理解)0.186秒(1.86µs/itn)-复制副本(old_list)0.075秒(0.75µs/itn)-列表(旧列表)0.053秒(0.53µs/itn)-新列表=[];新列表扩展(旧列表)0.039秒(0.39µs/itn)-old_list[:](列表切片)

所以最快的是列表切片。但请注意,与copy.deepcopy()和python版本不同,copy.copy()、list[:]和list(list)不会复制列表中的任何列表、字典和类实例,因此如果原始列表发生变化,它们也会在复制的列表中发生变化,反之亦然。

(如果有人感兴趣或想提出任何问题,以下是脚本:)

from copy import deepcopy

class old_class:
    def __init__(self):
        self.blah = 'blah'

class new_class(object):
    def __init__(self):
        self.blah = 'blah'

dignore = {str: None, unicode: None, int: None, type(None): None}

def Copy(obj, use_deepcopy=True):
    t = type(obj)

    if t in (list, tuple):
        if t == tuple:
            # Convert to a list if a tuple to
            # allow assigning to when copying
            is_tuple = True
            obj = list(obj)
        else:
            # Otherwise just do a quick slice copy
            obj = obj[:]
            is_tuple = False

        # Copy each item recursively
        for x in xrange(len(obj)):
            if type(obj[x]) in dignore:
                continue
            obj[x] = Copy(obj[x], use_deepcopy)

        if is_tuple:
            # Convert back into a tuple again
            obj = tuple(obj)

    elif t == dict:
        # Use the fast shallow dict copy() method and copy any
        # values which aren't immutable (like lists, dicts etc)
        obj = obj.copy()
        for k in obj:
            if type(obj[k]) in dignore:
                continue
            obj[k] = Copy(obj[k], use_deepcopy)

    elif t in dignore:
        # Numeric or string/unicode?
        # It's immutable, so ignore it!
        pass

    elif use_deepcopy:
        obj = deepcopy(obj)
    return obj

if __name__ == '__main__':
    import copy
    from time import time

    num_times = 100000
    L = [None, 'blah', 1, 543.4532,
         ['foo'], ('bar',), {'blah': 'blah'},
         old_class(), new_class()]

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        Copy(L)
    print 'Custom Copy:', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        Copy(L, use_deepcopy=False)
    print 'Custom Copy Only Copying Lists/Tuples/Dicts (no classes):', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        copy.copy(L)
    print 'copy.copy:', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        copy.deepcopy(L)
    print 'copy.deepcopy:', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        L[:]
    print 'list slicing [:]:', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        list(L)
    print 'list(L):', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        [i for i in L]
    print 'list expression(L):', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        a = []
        a.extend(L)
    print 'list extend:', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        a = []
        for y in L:
            a.append(y)
    print 'list append:', time()-t

    t = time()
    for i in xrange(num_times):
        a = []
        a.extend(i for i in L)
    print 'generator expression extend:', time()-t

这是因为,行new_list=my_list为变量my_list分配了一个新的引用,即new_list这类似于下面给出的C代码,

int my_list[] = [1,2,3,4];
int *new_list;
new_list = my_list;

您应该使用复制模块创建新列表

import copy
new_list = copy.deepcopy(my_list)

Python 3.6计时

下面是使用Python 3.6.8的计时结果。请记住,这些时间是相对的,而不是绝对的。

我坚持只做浅层复制,还添加了一些在Python 2中不可能的新方法,例如list.copy()(Python 3切片的等价物)和两种形式的列表解包(*new_list,=list和new_list=[*list]):

METHOD                TIME TAKEN
b = [*a]               2.75180600000021
b = a * 1              3.50215399999990
b = a[:]               3.78278899999986  # Python 2 winner (see above)
b = a.copy()           4.20556500000020  # Python 3 "slice equivalent" (see above)
b = []; b.extend(a)    4.68069800000012
b = a[0:len(a)]        6.84498999999959
*b, = a                7.54031799999984
b = list(a)            7.75815899999997
b = [i for i in a]    18.4886440000000
b = copy.copy(a)      18.8254879999999
b = []
for item in a:
  b.append(item)      35.4729199999997

我们可以看到,Python 2的获胜者仍然表现出色,但并没有远远超过Python 3 list.copy(),特别是考虑到后者的出色可读性。

黑马是拆包和重新包装方法(b=[*a]),它比原始切片快约25%,比其他拆包方法(*b,=a)快两倍多。

b=a*1的表现也出奇地好。

请注意,这些方法不会为列表以外的任何输入输出等效结果。它们都适用于可切片对象,少数适用于任何可迭代对象,但只有copy.copy()适用于更一般的Python对象。


以下是相关方的测试代码(此处的模板):

import timeit

COUNT = 50000000
print("Array duplicating. Tests run", COUNT, "times")
setup = 'a = [0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9]; import copy'

print("b = list(a)\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = list(a)', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = copy.copy(a)\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = copy.copy(a)', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = a.copy()\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = a.copy()', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = a[:]\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = a[:]', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = a[0:len(a)]\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = a[0:len(a)]', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("*b, = a\t\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='*b, = a', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = []; b.extend(a)\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = []; b.extend(a)', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = []; for item in a: b.append(item)\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = []\nfor item in a:  b.append(item)', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = [i for i in a]\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = [i for i in a]', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = [*a]\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = [*a]', setup=setup, number=COUNT))
print("b = a * 1\t\t", timeit.timeit(stmt='b = a * 1', setup=setup, number=COUNT))

通过id和gc查看内存的一个稍微实用的视角。

>>> b = a = ['hell', 'word']
>>> c = ['hell', 'word']

>>> id(a), id(b), id(c)
(4424020872, 4424020872, 4423979272) 
     |           |
      -----------

>>> id(a[0]), id(b[0]), id(c[0])
(4424018328, 4424018328, 4424018328) # all referring to same 'hell'
     |           |           |
      -----------------------

>>> id(a[0][0]), id(b[0][0]), id(c[0][0])
(4422785208, 4422785208, 4422785208) # all referring to same 'h'
     |           |           |
      -----------------------

>>> a[0] += 'o'
>>> a,b,c
(['hello', 'word'], ['hello', 'word'], ['hell', 'word'])  # b changed too
>>> id(a[0]), id(b[0]), id(c[0])
(4424018384, 4424018384, 4424018328) # augmented assignment changed a[0],b[0]
     |           |
      -----------

>>> b = a = ['hell', 'word']
>>> id(a[0]), id(b[0]), id(c[0])
(4424018328, 4424018328, 4424018328) # the same hell
     |           |           |
      -----------------------

>>> import gc
>>> gc.get_referrers(a[0]) 
[['hell', 'word'], ['hell', 'word']]  # one copy belong to a,b, the another for c
>>> gc.get_referrers(('hell'))
[['hell', 'word'], ['hell', 'word'], ('hell', None)] # ('hello', None) 

在已经给出的答案中,缺少了一个独立于python版本的非常简单的方法,您可以在大多数时间使用(至少我这样做):

new_list = my_list * 1       # Solution 1 when you are not using nested lists

但是,如果my_list包含其他容器(例如,嵌套列表),则必须按照复制库中上述答案中的其他建议使用deepcopy。例如:

import copy
new_list = copy.deepcopy(my_list)   # Solution 2 when you are using nested lists

。奖励:如果您不想复制元素,请使用(AKA浅层复制):

new_list = my_list[:]

让我们了解解决方案#1和解决方案#2之间的区别

>>> a = range(5)
>>> b = a*1
>>> a,b
([0, 1, 2, 3, 4], [0, 1, 2, 3, 4])
>>> a[2] = 55
>>> a,b
([0, 1, 55, 3, 4], [0, 1, 2, 3, 4])

正如您所看到的,当我们不使用嵌套列表时,解决方案#1工作得很好。让我们检查一下当我们将解决方案#1应用于嵌套列表时会发生什么。

>>> from copy import deepcopy
>>> a = [range(i,i+4) for i in range(3)]
>>> a
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5]]
>>> b = a*1
>>> c = deepcopy(a)
>>> for i in (a, b, c): print i
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5]]
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5]]
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5]]
>>> a[2].append('99')
>>> for i in (a, b, c): print i
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5, 99]]
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5, 99]]   # Solution #1 didn't work in nested list
[[0, 1, 2, 3], [1, 2, 3, 4], [2, 3, 4, 5]]       # Solution #2 - DeepCopy worked in nested list