Code Review Asked by kluvin on December 11, 2020
I have JSON which comes in bad shape:
data = [
{"ids": [1]},
{"ids": [3, 4]},
{"ids": [1, 2]},
{"ids": [4]},
{"ids": [3]},
{"ids": [2]},
] # LD. List of dictionaries.
I want it to get in shape, like this:
expected = [
[{"ids": [1]}, {"ids": [2]}], # Length = 1
[{"ids": [3, 4]}, {"ids": [1, 2]}], # Length = 2
] # LOLD. List is now list-of-lists of dictionaries.
To simplify the problem, we can remove the dictionaries of a single kv-pair, keeping in mind that we must reconstruct it later:
# in
[
[3, 4], [1, 2],
[1], [4], [3], [2]
]
# out
[
[[3, 4], [1, 2]]
[[1], [4], [3], [2]]
]
This is very easy. assemble . op . disassemble $ data
:
def main(ids):
return [list(x) for x in assemble(cardinality_groups(disassemble(ids)))]
def cardinality_groups(lol):
return [list(group) for _, group in groupby(sorted(lol, key=len), key=len)]
def assemble(data):
return [tag_datum(x) for x in data]
def tag_datum(datum):
return [{"ids": x} for x in datum]
def disassemble(ids):
return [x['ids'] for x in ids]
I insist, it must be simpler, purer! Although, I am not sure if Python sports the amenities to make things prettier. So please suggest functionality present in other languages.
I am curious about two ways the program can expand here, and some other things:
f(g(h(x)))
. I like f . g . h $ x
–it’s purer. It really bothers that I can’t do something like this in Python, or JavaScript–two of the most popular languages! Consequently, I frequently find myself doing either:someValue = dostuff(someInput)
valueIsNowSlightlyChanged = doMoreStuff(someValue)
iAmLosingTrack = doStuffMoreNow(valueIsNowSlightlyChanged)
final = wtf(iAmLosingTrack)
return final
Or variations thereof. At this point I don’t feel like using either language. Doing things this way isn’t, of course, isn’t always going to be possible, but I don’t even get the opportunity. Am I confused, or do I have a point, and you possibly a solution to my supposed confusion?
This code was originally written for a question on StackOverflow. I believe that I found a neat way to do it in comparison to the rest. Regardless, I must assume that I don’t have the only good solution. Do you have an example?
Feel free to interpret my questions liberally. Apologies if some is beyond the scope of this forum. I appreciate any pointers to literature on these topics, as well as all your impressions.
Please also let me know if I am unclear. Thank you!
You can avoid assemble
, disassemble
, tag_datum
if you leverage on key
param of both itertools.groupby
and sorted
and condense them into one simple function.
Write a function to return the length of each value in the dictionary.
val_len = lambda x: len(x['ids'])
Now pass this as argument for key in both itertools.groupby
and sorted
from itertools import groupby
def transform(data):
sorted_data = sorted(data, key=val_len)
return [list(group) for _, group in groupby(sorted_data, key=val_len)]
transform(data) # data taken from question itself.
# [[{'ids': [1]}, {'ids': [4]}, {'ids': [3]}, {'ids': [2]}],
# [{'ids': [3, 4]}, {'ids': [1, 2]}]]
sorted_data = sorted(data, key=val_len) # sorts data based the length of
# the value of 'ids'
# [{'ids': [1]}, ---|
# {'ids': [4]}, |-- group with length 1
# {'ids': [3]}, |
# {'ids': [2]}, ---|
# {'ids': [3, 4]},---|-- group with length 2
# {'ids': [1, 2]}]---|
groupby(sorted_data, key=val_len) # groups data based on the length of
# the value of 'ids'
Answered by Ch3steR on December 11, 2020
Get help from others!
Recent Answers
Recent Questions
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP