Merging dictionaries in C#

Viewed 379676

What's the best way to merge 2 or more dictionaries (Dictionary<T1,T2>) in C#? (3.0 features like LINQ are fine).

I'm thinking of a method signature along the lines of:

public static Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
                 Merge<TKey,TValue>(Dictionary<TKey,TValue>[] dictionaries);

or

public static Dictionary<TKey,TValue>
                 Merge<TKey,TValue>(IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey,TValue>> dictionaries);

EDIT: Got a cool solution from JaredPar and Jon Skeet, but I was thinking of something that handles duplicate keys. In case of collision, it doesn't matter which value is saved to the dict as long as it's consistent.

28 Answers

This partly depends on what you want to happen if you run into duplicates. For instance, you could do:

var result = dictionaries.SelectMany(dict => dict)
                         .ToDictionary(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value);

That will throw an exception if you get any duplicate keys.

EDIT: If you use ToLookup then you'll get a lookup which can have multiple values per key. You could then convert that to a dictionary:

var result = dictionaries.SelectMany(dict => dict)
                         .ToLookup(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value)
                         .ToDictionary(group => group.Key, group => group.First());

It's a bit ugly - and inefficient - but it's the quickest way to do it in terms of code. (I haven't tested it, admittedly.)

You could write your own ToDictionary2 extension method of course (with a better name, but I don't have time to think of one now) - it's not terribly hard to do, just overwriting (or ignoring) duplicate keys. The important bit (to my mind) is using SelectMany, and realising that a dictionary supports iteration over its key/value pairs.

The trivial solution would be:

using System.Collections.Generic;
...
public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    Merge<TKey,TValue>(IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> dictionaries)
{
    var result = new Dictionary<TKey, TValue>();
    foreach (var dict in dictionaries)
        foreach (var x in dict)
            result[x.Key] = x.Value;
    return result;
}

Try the following

static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    Merge<TKey, TValue>(this IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> enumerable)
{
    return enumerable.SelectMany(x => x).ToDictionary(x => x.Key, y => y.Value);
}

Here is a helper function I use:

using System.Collections.Generic;
namespace HelperMethods
{
    public static class MergeDictionaries
    {
        public static void Merge<TKey, TValue>(this IDictionary<TKey, TValue> first, IDictionary<TKey, TValue> second)
        {
            if (second == null || first == null) return;
            foreach (var item in second) 
                if (!first.ContainsKey(item.Key)) 
                    first.Add(item.Key, item.Value);
        }
    }
}

Option 1 : This depends on what you want to happen if you are sure that you don't have duplicate key in both dictionaries. than you could do:

var result = dictionary1.Union(dictionary2).ToDictionary(k => k.Key, v => v.Value)

Note : This will throw error if you get any duplicate keys in dictionaries.

Option 2 : If you can have duplicate key then you'll have to handle duplicate key with the using of where clause.

var result = dictionary1.Union(dictionary2.Where(k => !dictionary1.ContainsKey(k.Key))).ToDictionary(k => k.Key, v => v.Value)

Note : It will not get duplicate key. if there will be any duplicate key than it will get dictionary1's key.

Option 3 : If you want to use ToLookup. then you will get a lookup which can have multiple values per key. You could convert that lookup to a dictionary:

var result = dictionaries.SelectMany(dict => dict)
                         .ToLookup(pair => pair.Key, pair => pair.Value)
                         .ToDictionary(group => group.Key, group => group.First());

How about adding a params overload?

Also, you should type them as IDictionary for maximum flexibility.

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>(IEnumerable<IDictionary<TKey, TValue>> dictionaries)
{
    // ...
}

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>(params IDictionary<TKey, TValue>[] dictionaries)
{
    return Merge((IEnumerable<TKey, TValue>) dictionaries);
}

Simplified again from earlier without LINQ and a bool default of non-destructive merge if existing or overwrite entirely if true rather than using an enum. It still suits my own needs without any fancier code ever being required:

using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

public static partial class Extensions
{
    public static void Merge<K, V>(this IDictionary<K, V> target, 
                                   IDictionary<K, V> source, 
                                   bool overwrite = false)
    {
        foreach (KeyValuePair _ in source)
            if (overwrite || !target.ContainsKey(_.Key))
                target[_.Key] = _.Value;
    }
}

Note that if you use an extension method called 'Add', you get to use collection initializers to combine as many dictionaries as needed like this:

public static void Add<K, V>(this Dictionary<K, V> d, Dictionary<K, V> other) {
  foreach (var kvp in other)
  {
    if (!d.ContainsKey(kvp.Key))
    {
      d.Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
    }
  }
}


var s0 = new Dictionary<string, string> {
  { "A", "X"}
};
var s1 = new Dictionary<string, string> {
  { "A", "X" },
  { "B", "Y" }
};
// Combine as many dictionaries and key pairs as needed
var a = new Dictionary<string, string> {
  s0, s1, s0, s1, s1, { "C", "Z" }
};

Got scared to see complex answers, being new to C#.

Here are some simple answers.
Merging d1, d2, and so on.. dictionaries and handle any overlapping keys ("b" in below examples):

Example 1

{
    // 2 dictionaries,  "b" key is common with different values

    var d1 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "a", 10 }, { "b", 21 } };
    var d2 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "c", 30 }, { "b", 22 } };

    var result1 = d1.Concat(d2).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.First().Value);
    // result1 is  a=10, b=21, c=30    That is, took the "b" value of the first dictionary

    var result2 = d1.Concat(d2).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.Last().Value);
    // result2 is  a=10, b=22, c=30    That is, took the "b" value of the last dictionary
}

Example 2

{
    // 3 dictionaries,  "b" key is common with different values

    var d1 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "a", 10 }, { "b", 21 } };
    var d2 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "c", 30 }, { "b", 22 } };
    var d3 = new Dictionary<string, int>() { { "d", 40 }, { "b", 23 } };

    var result1 = d1.Concat(d2).Concat(d3).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.First().Value);
    // result1 is  a=10, b=21, c=30, d=40    That is, took the "b" value of the first dictionary

    var result2 = d1.Concat(d2).Concat(d3).GroupBy(ele => ele.Key).ToDictionary(ele => ele.Key, ele => ele.Last().Value);
    // result2 is  a=10, b=23, c=30, d=40    That is, took the "b" value of the last dictionary
}

For more complex scenarios, see other answers.
Hope that helped.

using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Linq;

public static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    public enum MergeKind { SkipDuplicates, OverwriteDuplicates }
    public static void Merge<K, V>(this IDictionary<K, V> target, IDictionary<K, V> source, MergeKind kind = MergeKind.SkipDuplicates) =>
        source.ToList().ForEach(_ => { if (kind == MergeKind.OverwriteDuplicates || !target.ContainsKey(_.Key)) target[_.Key] = _.Value; });
}

You can either skip/ignore (default) or overwrite the duplicates: And Bob's your uncle provided you are not overly fussy about Linq performance but prefer instead concise maintainable code as I do: in which case you can remove the default MergeKind.SkipDuplicates to enforce a choice for the caller and make the developer cognisant of what the results will be!

A version from @user166390 answer with an added IEqualityComparer parameter to allow for case insensitive key comparison.

    public static T MergeLeft<T, K, V>(this T me, params Dictionary<K, V>[] others)
        where T : Dictionary<K, V>, new()
    {
        return me.MergeLeft(me.Comparer, others);
    }

    public static T MergeLeft<T, K, V>(this T me, IEqualityComparer<K> comparer, params Dictionary<K, V>[] others)
        where T : Dictionary<K, V>, new()
    {
        T newMap = Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(T), new object[] { comparer }) as T;

        foreach (Dictionary<K, V> src in 
            (new List<Dictionary<K, V>> { me }).Concat(others))
        {
            // ^-- echk. Not quite there type-system.
            foreach (KeyValuePair<K, V> p in src)
            {
                newMap[p.Key] = p.Value;
            }
        }
        return newMap;
    }

This is my solution: it behaves like the dict.update() method in python.

public static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    public static void Update<K,V>(this IDictionary<K, V> me, IDictionary<K, V> other)
    {
        foreach (var x in other)
        {
            me[x.Key] = x.Value;
        }
    }
}

Merging using an extension method. It does not throw exception when there are duplicate keys, but replaces those keys with keys from the second dictionary.

internal static class DictionaryExtensions
{
    public static Dictionary<T1, T2> Merge<T1, T2>(this Dictionary<T1, T2> first, Dictionary<T1, T2> second)
    {
        if (first == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("first");
        if (second == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("second");

        var merged = new Dictionary<T1, T2>();
        first.ToList().ForEach(kv => merged[kv.Key] = kv.Value);
        second.ToList().ForEach(kv => merged[kv.Key] = kv.Value);

        return merged;
    }
}

Usage:

Dictionary<string, string> merged = first.Merge(second);
public static IDictionary<K, V> AddRange<K, V>(this IDictionary<K, V> one, IDictionary<K, V> two)
        {
            foreach (var kvp in two)
            {
                if (one.ContainsKey(kvp.Key))
                    one[kvp.Key] = two[kvp.Key];
                else
                    one.Add(kvp.Key, kvp.Value);
            }
            return one;
        }

or :

public static IDictionary<TKey, TValue> Merge<TKey, TValue>( IDictionary<TKey, TValue> x, IDictionary<TKey, TValue> y)
    {
        return x
            .Except(x.Join(y, z => z.Key, z => z.Key, (a, b) => a))
            .Concat(y)
            .ToDictionary(z => z.Key, z => z.Value);
    }

the result is a union where for duplicate entries "y" wins.

I'd split @orip's simple and non-garbage creating solution to provide a in-place AddAll() in addition to Merge() to handle the simple case of adding one dictionary to another.

using System.Collections.Generic;
...
public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    AddAll<TKey,TValue>(Dictionary<TKey, TValue> dest, Dictionary<TKey, TValue> source)
{
    foreach (var x in source)
        dest[x.Key] = x.Value;
}

public static Dictionary<TKey, TValue>
    Merge<TKey,TValue>(IEnumerable<Dictionary<TKey, TValue>> dictionaries)
{
    var result = new Dictionary<TKey, TValue>();
    foreach (var dict in dictionaries)
        result.AddAll(dict);
    return result;
}

Based on all the answers on this post, here's the most generic solution I could came up with.

I created 2 versions of the IDictionary.Merge() extension :

  • Merge<T, U>(sourceLeft, sourceRight)
  • Merge<T, U>(sourceLeft, sourceRight, Func<U, U, U> mergeExpression)

Where the second is a modified version of the first that lets you specify a lambda expression to handle duplicates like this :

Dictionary<string, object> customAttributes = 
  HtmlHelper
    .AnonymousObjectToHtmlAttributes(htmlAttributes)
    .ToDictionary(
      ca => ca.Key, 
      ca => ca.Value
    );

Dictionary<string, object> fixedAttributes = 
  new RouteValueDictionary(
    new { 
      @class = "form-control"
    }).ToDictionary(
      fa => fa.Key, 
      fa => fa.Value
    );

//appending the html class attributes
IDictionary<string, object> editorAttributes = fixedAttributes.Merge(customAttributes, (leftValue, rightValue) => leftValue + " " + rightValue);

(You can focus on the ToDictionary() and Merge() parts)

And here's the extension class (with 2 versions of the extension that take a collection of IDictionary on the right side):

  public static class IDictionaryExtension
  {
    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IDictionary<T, U> sourceRight)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T,U>();

      sourceLeft
        .Concat(sourceRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(kvp => 
          result[kvp.Key] = kvp.Value
        );

      return result;
    }

    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IDictionary<T, U> sourceRight, Func<U, U, U> mergeExpression)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T,U>();

      //Merge expression example
      //(leftValue, rightValue) => leftValue + " " + rightValue;

      sourceLeft
        .Concat(sourceRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(kvp => 
          result[kvp.Key] =
            (!result.ContainsKey(kvp.Key))
              ? kvp.Value
              : mergeExpression(result[kvp.Key], kvp.Value)
        );

      return result;
    }


    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IEnumerable<IDictionary<T, U>> sourcesRight)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T, U>();
      
      new[] { sourceLeft }
        .Concat(sourcesRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(dic =>
          result = result.Merge(dic)
        );

      return result;
    }

    public static IDictionary<T, U> Merge<T, U>(this IDictionary<T, U> sourceLeft, IEnumerable<IDictionary<T, U>> sourcesRight, Func<U, U, U> mergeExpression)
    {
      IDictionary<T, U> result = new Dictionary<T, U>();

      new[] { sourceLeft }
        .Concat(sourcesRight)
        .ToList()
        .ForEach(dic =>
          result = result.Merge(dic, mergeExpression)
        );

      return result;
    }
  }

The mergeExpression let's you easily handle the way you want to merge the items, like addition, division, multiplication or any kind of specific process you desire.

Note that I've not yet tested the collection versions of the extension... they may still require some tuning.

Also, the extension does NOT modify the original dictionaries, you'll have to assign it back if you want to.

Related