Sorry for this newbie questions.
I have a dict like this:
{'id':'1', 'Book':'21', 'Member':'3', 'Title':'Chameleon vol. 2',
'Author':'Jason Bridge'}
I want to convert that dict to:
{'id':1, 'Book':21, 'Member':3, 'Title':'Chameleon vol. 2',
'Author':'Jason Bridge'}
I need to convert only the first 3 key value to int
Thanks in advance
dict1 = {'id':'1', 'Book':'21', 'Member':'3', 'Title':'Chameleon vol. 2', 'Author':'Jason Bridge'}
y_dict = dict(list(dict1.items())[:3])
print(y_dict) #dict sliced to the first 3 items that their values will be converted
z_dict = dict(list(dict1.items())[3:])
print(z_dict) #the rest of item that their values will not be converted to integer
x_dict = {k:int(v) for k, v in y_dict.items()}
print(x_dict) # dict values converted to integer
w_dict = {**x_dict, **z_dict}
print(w_dict) # merge of first 3 items with values as integer and the rest of the dict intact
w_dict is the result you are looking for.
Let's say your dict stored in "book_data" variable.
What means first 3 keys?
If you have static keys, you can set manually for it:
for key in ['id', 'Book', 'Member']:
book_data[key] = int(book_data[key])
If you have mutable dictionary, you may get it with it:
for key, val in list(book_data.items())[:3]:
book_data[key] = int(val)
method items help you avoid iterate over values.
ex = ['$5','Amazon','spoon']
I want to re-order this list, website - item - price.
Can I assign the index, for instance, ex.index('Amazon') = 1?
I'd like the result to be ['Amazon','spoon','$5']
I found information on how to swap positions, but I would like to know if I can assign an index for each item myself.
You cannot assign an index to an item, but you can build a permuted list according to a permutation pattern:
ex = ['$5','Amazon','spoon']
order = [1, 2, 0]
ex_new = [ex[i] for i in order]
print(ex_new)
#['Amazon', 'spoon', '$5']
Alternatively, you can overwrite the original list in place:
ex[:] = [ex[i] for i in order]
print(ex)
#['Amazon', 'spoon', '$5']
Just wondering does the filter turn the data into tuples? For example
val filesLines = sc.textFile("file.txt")
val split_lines = filesLines.map(_.split(";"))
val filteredData = split_lines.filter(x => x(4)=="Blue")
//from here if we wanted to map the data would it be using tuple format ie. x._3 OR x(3)
val blueRecords = filteredData.map(x => x._1, x._2)
OR
val blueRecords = filteredData.map(x => x(0), x(1))
No, all filter does is take a predicate function and uses it such that any of the datapoints in the set that return a false when passed through that predicate, then they are not passed back out to the resultant set. So, the data remians the same:
filesLines //RDD[String] (lines of the file)
split_lines //RDD[Array[String]] (lines delimited by semicolon)
filteredData //RDD[Array[String]] (lines delimited by semicolon where the 5th item is Blue
So, to use filteredData, you will have to access the data as an array using parentheses with the appropriate index
filter will not change the RDD - filtered data would still be RDD(Array[String])
1.Three lists a, b and c. If a[index] is in b[index] then get the element in list c corresponding to list b[index]. That is if a[0]=b[1],get c[1]:
a = ['ASAP','WTHK']
b = ['ABCD','ASAP','EFGH','HIJK']
c = ['1','2','3','4','5']
I hope this is what you were looking for. You can add the b and the corresponding c value to the dictionary in a loop if the a array contains the b value. After that you can get the c value by a value as key like in the code below.
a = ['ASAP','WTHK']
# b c
dictionary_trans = {'ASAP' : '1'}
dictionary_trans = {'WTHK' : '1337'}
# etc. put all b values existing in a to the dict
# with thier coresponding c values.
key = a[0]
c_value = dictionary_trans.get(key)
print c_value
My python skills are very limited, but I think I would try to solve the problem this way.
This solution could crash if you use an a value which is not contained in the dictionary, so you need to implement some logic to handle missing relations between a and c, like insert dummy entries to the dictionary or so.
For example i have erlang record:
-record(state, {clients
}).
Can i make from clients field list?
That I could keep in client filed as in normal list? And how can i add some values in this list?
Thank you.
Maybe you mean something like:
-module(reclist).
-export([empty_state/0, some_state/0,
add_client/1, del_client/1,
get_clients/1]).
-record(state,
{
clients = [] ::[pos_integer()],
dbname ::char()
}).
empty_state() ->
#state{}.
some_state() ->
#state{
clients = [1,2,3],
dbname = "QA"}.
del_client(Client) ->
S = some_state(),
C = S#state.clients,
S#state{clients = lists:delete(Client, C)}.
add_client(Client) ->
S = some_state(),
C = S#state.clients,
S#state{clients = [Client|C]}.
get_clients(#state{clients = C, dbname = _D}) ->
C.
Test:
1> reclist:empty_state().
{state,[],undefined}
2> reclist:some_state().
{state,[1,2,3],"QA"}
3> reclist:add_client(4).
{state,[4,1,2,3],"QA"}
4> reclist:del_client(2).
{state,[1,3],"QA"}
::[pos_integer()] means that the type of the field is a list of positive integer values, starting from 1; it's the hint for the analysis tool dialyzer, when it performs type checking.
Erlang also allows you use pattern matching on records:
5> reclist:get_clients(reclist:some_state()).
[1,2,3]
Further reading:
Records
Types and Function Specifications
dialyzer(1)
#JUST MY correct OPINION's answer made me remember that I love how Haskell goes about getting the values of the fields in the data type.
Here's a definition of a data type, stolen from Learn You a Haskell for Great Good!, which leverages record syntax:
data Car = Car {company :: String
,model :: String
,year :: Int
} deriving (Show)
It creates functions company, model and year, that lookup fields in the data type. We first make a new car:
ghci> Car "Toyota" "Supra" 2005
Car {company = "Toyota", model = "Supra", year = 2005}
Or, using record syntax (the order of fields doesn't matter):
ghci> Car {model = "Supra", year = 2005, company = "Toyota"}
Car {company = "Toyota", model = "Supra", year = 2005}
ghci> let supra = Car {model = "Supra", year = 2005, company = "Toyota"}
ghci> year supra
2005
We can even use pattern matching:
ghci> let (Car {company = c, model = m, year = y}) = supra
ghci> "This " ++ c ++ " " ++ m ++ " was made in " ++ show y
"This Toyota Supra was made in 2005"
I remember there were attempts to implement something similar to Haskell's record syntax in Erlang, but not sure if they were successful.
Some posts, concerning these attempts:
In Response to "What Sucks About Erlang"
Geeking out with Lisp Flavoured Erlang. However I would ignore parameterized modules here.
It seems that LFE uses macros, which are similar to what provides Scheme (Racket, for instance), when you want to create a new value of some structure:
> (define-struct car (company model year))
> (define supra (make-car "Toyota" "Supra" 2005))
> (car-model supra)
"Supra"
I hope we'll have something close to Haskell record syntax in the future, that would be really practically useful and handy.
Yasir's answer is the correct one, but I'm going to show you WHY it works the way it works so you can understand records a bit better.
Records in Erlang are a hack (and a pretty ugly one). Using the record definition from Yasir's answer...
-record(state,
{
clients = [] ::[pos_integer()],
dbname ::char()
}).
...when you instantiate this with #state{} (as Yasir did in empty_state/0 function), what you really get back is this:
{state, [], undefined}
That is to say your "record" is just a tuple tagged with the name of the record (state in this case) followed by the record's contents. Inside BEAM itself there is no record. It's just another tuple with Erlang data types contained within it. This is the key to understanding how things work (and the limitations of records to boot).
Now when Yasir did this...
add_client(Client) ->
S = some_state(),
C = S#state.clients,
S#state{clients = [Client|C]}.
...the S#state.clients bit translates into code internally that looks like element(2,S). You're using, in other words, standard tuple manipulation functions. S#state.clients is just a symbolic way of saying the same thing, but in a way that lets you know what element 2 actually is. It's syntactic saccharine that's an improvement over keeping track of individual fields in your tuples in an error-prone way.
Now for that last S#state{clients = [Client|C]} bit, I'm not absolutely positive as to what code is generated behind the scenes, but it is likely just straightforward stuff that does the equivalent of {state, [Client|C], element(3,S)}. It:
tags a new tuple with the name of the record (provided as #state),
copies the elements from S (dictated by the S# portion),
except for the clients piece overridden by {clients = [Client|C]}.
All of this magic is done via a preprocessing hack behind the scenes.
Understanding how records work behind the scenes is beneficial both for understanding code written using records as well as for understanding how to use them yourself (not to mention understanding why things that seem to "make sense" don't work with records -- because they don't actually exist down in the abstract machine...yet).
If you are only adding or removing single items from the clients list in the state you could cut down on typing with a macro.
-record(state, {clients = [] }).
-define(AddClientToState(Client,State),
State#state{clients = lists:append([Client], State#state.clients) } ).
-define(RemoveClientFromState(Client,State),
State#state{clients = lists:delete(Client, State#state.clients) } ).
Here is a test escript that demonstrates:
#!/usr/bin/env escript
-record(state, {clients = [] }).
-define(AddClientToState(Client,State),
State#state{clients = lists:append([Client], State#state.clients)} ).
-define(RemoveClientFromState(Client,State),
State#state{clients = lists:delete(Client, State#state.clients)} ).
main(_) ->
%Start with a state with a empty list of clients.
State0 = #state{},
io:format("Empty State: ~p~n",[State0]),
%Add foo to the list
State1 = ?AddClientToState(foo,State0),
io:format("State after adding foo: ~p~n",[State1]),
%Add bar to the list.
State2 = ?AddClientToState(bar,State1),
io:format("State after adding bar: ~p~n",[State2]),
%Add baz to the list.
State3 = ?AddClientToState(baz,State2),
io:format("State after adding baz: ~p~n",[State3]),
%Remove bar from the list.
State4 = ?RemoveClientFromState(bar,State3),
io:format("State after removing bar: ~p~n",[State4]).
Result:
Empty State: {state,[]}
State after adding foo: {state,[foo]}
State after adding bar: {state,[bar,foo]}
State after adding baz: {state,[baz,bar,foo]}
State after removing bar: {state,[baz,foo]}