Yes, it is normal as lists are mutable in python and this operation:
MySecondList = MyList
simply creates a new reference to the same list object and list.append
modifies the same object in-place.(other operations like +=
, list.extend
, list.pop
etc also modify the list in-place)
You can use a shallow copy here:
MySecondList = MyList[:]
Demo:
>>> from sys import getrefcount
>>> lis = [1,2,3]
>>> foo = lis #creates a new reference to the same object [1,2,3]
>>> lis is foo
True
>>> getrefcount(lis) #number of references to the same object
3 #foo , lis and shell itself
#you can modify the list [1,2,3] from any of it's references
>>> foo.append(4)
>>> lis.append(5)
>>> foo,lis
([1, 2, 3, 4, 5], [1, 2, 3, 4, 5])
>>> lis = [1,2,3]
>>> foo = lis[:] #assigns a shallow copy of lis to foo
>>> foo is lis
False
>>> getrefcount(lis) #still 2(lis + shell_, as foo points to a different object
2
#different results here
>>> foo.append(4)
>>> lis.append(5)
>>> foo, lis
([1, 2, 3, 4], [1, 2, 3, 5])
For a lists of lists(or list of mutable objects) a shallow copy is not enough as the inner lists(or objects) are just new references to the same object:
>>> lis = [[1,2,3],[4,5,6]]
>>> foo = lis[:]
>>> foo is lis #lis and foo are different
False
>>> [id(x) for x in lis] #but inner lists are still same
[3056076428L, 3056076716L]
>>> [id(x) for x in foo] #same IDs of inner lists, i.e foo[0] is lis[0] == True
[3056076428L, 3056076716L]
>>> foo[0][0] = 100 # modifying one will affect the other as well
>>> lis[0],foo[0]
([100, 2, 3], [100, 2, 3])
For such cases use copy.deepcopy
:
>>> from copy import deepcopy
>>> lis = [[1,2,3],[4,5,6]]
>>> foo = deepcopy(lis)