Concatenation of the result of a function with a mutable default argument

Solution 1:

That's actually pretty interesting!

As we know, the list l in the function definition is initialized only once at the definition of this function, and for all invocations of this function, there will be exactly one copy of this list. Now, the function modifies this list, which means that multiple calls to this function will modify the exact same object multiple times. This is the first important part.

Now, consider the expression that adds these lists:

f()+f()+f()

According to the laws of operator precedence, this is equivalent to the following:

(f() + f()) + f()

...which is exactly the same as this:

temp1 = f() + f() # (1)
temp2 = temp1 + f() # (2)

This is the second important part.

Addition of lists produces a new object, without modifying any of its arguments. This is the third important part.

Now let's combine what we know together.

In line 1 above, the first call returns [0], as you'd expect. The second call returns [0, 1], as you'd expect. Oh, wait! The function will return the exact same object (not its copy!) over and over again, after modifying it! This means that the object that the first call returned has now changed to become [0, 1] as well! And that's why temp1 == [0, 1] + [0, 1].

The result of addition, however, is a completely new object, so [0, 1, 0, 1] + f() is the same as [0, 1, 0, 1] + [0, 1, 2]. Note that the second list is, again, exactly what you'd expect your function to return. The same thing happens when you add f() + ["-"]: this creates a new list object, so that any other calls to f won't interfere with it.

You can reproduce this by concatenating the results of two function calls:

>>> f() + f()
[0, 1, 0, 1]
>>> f() + f()
[0, 1, 2, 3, 0, 1, 2, 3]
>>> f() + f()
[0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Again, you can do all that because you're concatenating references to the same object.

Solution 2:

Here's a way to think about it that might help it make sense:

A function is a data structure. You create one with a def block, much the same way as you create a type with a class block or you create a list with square brackets.

The most interesting part of that data structure is the code that gets run when the function is called, but the default arguments are also part of it! In fact, you can inspect both the code and the default arguments from Python, via attributes on the function:

>>> def foo(a=1): pass
... 
>>> dir(foo)
['__annotations__', '__call__', '__class__', '__closure__', '__code__', '__defaults__', ...]
>>> foo.__code__
<code object foo at 0x7f114752a660, file "<stdin>", line 1>
>>> foo.__defaults__
(1,)

(A much nicer interface for this is inspect.signature, but all it does is examine those attributes.)

So the reason that this modifies the list:

def f(l=[]):
    l.append(len(l))
    return l

is exactly the same reason that this also modifies the list:

f = dict(l=[])
f['l'].append(len(f['l']))

In both cases, you're mutating a list that belongs to some parent structure, so the change will naturally be visible in the parent as well.

Note that this is a design decision that Python specifically made, and it's not inherently necessary in a language. JavaScript recently learned about default arguments, but it treats them as expressions to be re-evaluated anew on each call — essentially, each default argument is its own tiny function. The advantage is that JS doesn't have this gotcha, but the drawback is that you can't meaningfully inspect the defaults the way you can in Python.