Order of operations in a dictionary comprehension

Question

I came across the following interesting construct:

assuming you have a list of lists as follows:

my_list = [[\'captain1\', \'foo1\', \'bar1\', \'foobar1\         


        

Answer 1

Note: As of Python 3.8 and PEP 572, this was changed and the keys are evaluated first.

---

tl;dr Until Python 3.7: Even though Python does evaluate values first (the right-side of the expression) this does appear to be a bug in (C)Python according to the reference manual and the grammar and the PEP on dict comprehensions.

Though this was previously fixed for dictionary displays where values were again evaluated before the keys, the patch wasn't amended to include dict-comprehensions. This requirement was also mentioned by one of the core-devs in a mailing list thread discussing this same subject.

According to the reference manual, Python evaluates expressions from left to right and assignments from right to left; a dict-comprehension is really an expression containing expressions, not an assignment^*:

{expr1: expr2 for ...}

where, according to the corresponding rule of the grammar one would expect expr1: expr2 to be evaluated similarly to what it does in displays. So, both expressions should follow the defined order, expr1 should be evaluated before expr2 (and, if expr2 contains expressions of its own, they too should be evaluated from left to right.)

The PEP on dict-comps additionally states that the following should be semantically equivalent:

The semantics of dict comprehensions can actually be demonstrated in stock Python 2.2, by passing a list comprehension to the built-in dictionary constructor:

>>> dict([(i, chr(65+i)) for i in range(4)])

is semantically equivalent to:

>>> {i : chr(65+i) for i in range(4)}

were the tuple (i, chr(65+i)) is evaluated left to right as expected.

Changing this to behave according to the rules for expressions would create an inconsistency in the creation of dicts, of course. Dictionary comprehensions and a for loop with assignments result in a different evaluation order but, that's fine since it is just following the rules.

Though this isn't a major issue it should be fixed (either the rule of evaluation, or the docs) to disambiguate the situation.

^*Internally, this does result in an assignment to a dictionary object but, this shouldn't break the behavior expressions should have. Users have expectations about how expressions should behave as stated in the reference manual.

---

As the other answerers pointed out, since you perform a mutating action in one of the expressions, you toss out any information on what gets evaluated first; using print calls, as Duncan did, sheds light on what is done.

A function to help in showing the discrepancy:

def printer(val):
    print(val, end=' ')
    return val

(Fixed) dictionary display:

>>> d = {printer(0): printer(1), printer(2): printer(3)}
0 1 2 3

(Odd) dictionary comprehension:

>>> t = (0, 1), (2, 3)
>>> d = {printer(i):printer(j) for i,j in t}
1 0 3 2

and yes, this applies specifically for CPython. I am not aware of how other implementations evaluate this specific case (though they should all conform to the Python Reference Manual.)

Digging through the source is always nice (and you also find hidden comments describing the behavior too), so let's peek in compiler_sync_comprehension_generator of the file compile.c:

case COMP_DICTCOMP:
    /* With 'd[k] = v', v is evaluated before k, so we do
       the same. */
    VISIT(c, expr, val);
    VISIT(c, expr, elt);
    ADDOP_I(c, MAP_ADD, gen_index + 1);
    break;

this might seem like a good enough reason and, if it is judged as such, should be classified as a documentation bug, instead.

On a quick test I did, switching these statements around (VISIT(c, expr, elt); getting visited first) while also switching the corresponding order in MAP_ADD (which is used for dict-comps):

TARGET(MAP_ADD) {
    PyObject *value = TOP();   # was key 
    PyObject *key = SECOND();  # was value
    PyObject *map;
    int err;

results in the evaluation one would expect based on the docs, with the key evaluated before the value. (Not for their asynchronous versions, that's another switch required.)

---

I'll drop a comment on the issue and update when and if someone gets back to me.

Created Issue 29652 -- Fix evaluation order of keys/values in dict comprehensions on the tracker. Will update the question when progress is made on it.