Trouble deciding what and how to inherit - python-3.x

I have a constructor in my parent class that takes four parameters. In my subclass, I need to have one that takes three parameters. In the parent class I the first parameter is length. The subclass will have a set length.
I have tried many things, but none of them have worked. The one in the code that I added is one of them.
class X:
def __init__(self, len, speed, locate, direction):
self._len = len
self._speed = speed
self._locate = locate
self._direction = direction
from X import X
class Y(X):
def __int__(self, speed, locate, direction):
super().__init__(speed, locate, direction)
# one thing I've tried
self._len = 3.0
When I create an object and try to pass three parameters in it says that I am missing a direction.

Simply pass *args and **kwargs to both of your class inits:
class X:
def __init__(self, len, speed, locate, direction, *args, **kwargs):
self._len = len
self._speed = speed
self._locate = locate
self._direction = direction
from X import X
class Y(X):
def __int__(self, speed, locate, direction, *args, **kwargs):
super().__init__(speed, locate, direction, *args, **kwargs)
If you are unsure about what the asterisk does, this question is a good resource.

This works. You had a typo: def __int__( should be def __init__(
class X:
def __init__(self, length, speed, locate, direction):
self._len = length
self._speed = speed
self._locate = locate
self._direction = direction
class Y(X):
def __init__(self, speed, locate, direction):
super().__init__(3.0, speed, locate, direction)
y = Y(10, 20, 30)
print(y._len, y._speed, y._locate, y._direction)
# prints 3.0 10 20 30

I would suggest below code
class Y(X):
def __int__(self, speed, locate, direction):
X.__init__(3.0, speed, locate, direction)
Here are some points to note
I prefer using parent class name (X) because it will be unambiguous incase of multiple inheritance
Now your y class use _len member of parent class
I would suggest to avoid *args, **kwargs because explicit is better than implicit, you don't know what behaviour you want of new parameters added latter in superclass so it is better if it generates error in that case so you can explicitly decide what to do with them

Related

Making a Class subscriptable: why two similar-looking example behave so differently

I am trying to wrap me head around the __getitem__ method and have concocted the following two minimal examples. The purpose it to make an object subscriptable.
class MotherList():
def __init__ (self, input_list):
self.Children = input_list
def __getitem__(self, index):
return self.Children[index]
ml = MotherList([1,2,3)
ml[1] = 2
This does work as expected.
On the other hand, if I take the mother class out from the picture, as in
class PseudoList():
def __init__ (self, input_list):
self = input_list
def __getitem__(self, index):
return self[index]
pl = PseudoList([1,2,3)
ps[1] =
an errror is handed out, maximum recursion depth exceeded.
I understand something must be going wrong in the self= input_list assignment, but cannot figure it out. If everything is just "shifted" one children class lower, all works well.
Any suggestions please? I am literally just learning OOP.

Is it posible to use super() with all the parents in Python3 multiple inheritance?

If a class has 2 or more parents, how can I use super(), or any equivalent, to make reference to each of them? For example here:
class A:
def __init__(self, x): self.a = x
class B:
def __init__(self, y): self.b = y
class C(A,B):
def __init__(self, x, y):
super().__init__(x)
B.__init__(self,y) # I would to like to use super() here too
ObjetoC = C(4,3);
print (ObjetoC.a, ObjetoC.b) # It works fine
PD: I understand the MROrder. I just wonder if there is a way to reach a non-priority parent with super() or equivalent. Or if there is another elegant way to do that I have already done by using B.__init__(self,y)

Redefining a function for a different type [duplicate]

I know that Python does not support method overloading, but I've run into a problem that I can't seem to solve in a nice Pythonic way.
I am making a game where a character needs to shoot a variety of bullets, but how do I write different functions for creating these bullets? For example suppose I have a function that creates a bullet travelling from point A to B with a given speed. I would write a function like this:
def add_bullet(sprite, start, headto, speed):
# Code ...
But I want to write other functions for creating bullets like:
def add_bullet(sprite, start, direction, speed):
def add_bullet(sprite, start, headto, spead, acceleration):
def add_bullet(sprite, script): # For bullets that are controlled by a script
def add_bullet(sprite, curve, speed): # for bullets with curved paths
# And so on ...
And so on with many variations. Is there a better way to do it without using so many keyword arguments cause its getting kinda ugly fast. Renaming each function is pretty bad too because you get either add_bullet1, add_bullet2, or add_bullet_with_really_long_name.
To address some answers:
No I can't create a Bullet class hierarchy because thats too slow. The actual code for managing bullets is in C and my functions are wrappers around C API.
I know about the keyword arguments but checking for all sorts of combinations of parameters is getting annoying, but default arguments help allot like acceleration=0
What you are asking for is called multiple dispatch. See Julia language examples which demonstrates different types of dispatches.
However, before looking at that, we'll first tackle why overloading is not really what you want in Python.
Why Not Overloading?
First, one needs to understand the concept of overloading and why it's not applicable to Python.
When working with languages that can discriminate data types at
compile-time, selecting among the alternatives can occur at
compile-time. The act of creating such alternative functions for
compile-time selection is usually referred to as overloading a
function. (Wikipedia)
Python is a dynamically typed language, so the concept of overloading simply does not apply to it. However, all is not lost, since we can create such alternative functions at run-time:
In programming languages that defer data type identification until
run-time the selection among alternative
functions must occur at run-time, based on the dynamically determined
types of function arguments. Functions whose alternative
implementations are selected in this manner are referred to most
generally as multimethods. (Wikipedia)
So we should be able to do multimethods in Python—or, as it is alternatively called: multiple dispatch.
Multiple dispatch
The multimethods are also called multiple dispatch:
Multiple dispatch or multimethods is the feature of some
object-oriented programming languages in which a function or method
can be dynamically dispatched based on the run time (dynamic) type of
more than one of its arguments. (Wikipedia)
Python does not support this out of the box1, but, as it happens, there is an excellent Python package called multipledispatch that does exactly that.
Solution
Here is how we might use multipledispatch2 package to implement your methods:
>>> from multipledispatch import dispatch
>>> from collections import namedtuple
>>> from types import * # we can test for lambda type, e.g.:
>>> type(lambda a: 1) == LambdaType
True
>>> Sprite = namedtuple('Sprite', ['name'])
>>> Point = namedtuple('Point', ['x', 'y'])
>>> Curve = namedtuple('Curve', ['x', 'y', 'z'])
>>> Vector = namedtuple('Vector', ['x','y','z'])
>>> #dispatch(Sprite, Point, Vector, int)
... def add_bullet(sprite, start, direction, speed):
... print("Called Version 1")
...
>>> #dispatch(Sprite, Point, Point, int, float)
... def add_bullet(sprite, start, headto, speed, acceleration):
... print("Called version 2")
...
>>> #dispatch(Sprite, LambdaType)
... def add_bullet(sprite, script):
... print("Called version 3")
...
>>> #dispatch(Sprite, Curve, int)
... def add_bullet(sprite, curve, speed):
... print("Called version 4")
...
>>> sprite = Sprite('Turtle')
>>> start = Point(1,2)
>>> direction = Vector(1,1,1)
>>> speed = 100 #km/h
>>> acceleration = 5.0 #m/s**2
>>> script = lambda sprite: sprite.x * 2
>>> curve = Curve(3, 1, 4)
>>> headto = Point(100, 100) # somewhere far away
>>> add_bullet(sprite, start, direction, speed)
Called Version 1
>>> add_bullet(sprite, start, headto, speed, acceleration)
Called version 2
>>> add_bullet(sprite, script)
Called version 3
>>> add_bullet(sprite, curve, speed)
Called version 4
1. Python 3 currently supports single dispatch
2. Take care not to use multipledispatch in a multi-threaded environment or you will get weird behavior.
Python does support "method overloading" as you present it. In fact, what you just describe is trivial to implement in Python, in so many different ways, but I would go with:
class Character(object):
# your character __init__ and other methods go here
def add_bullet(self, sprite=default, start=default,
direction=default, speed=default, accel=default,
curve=default):
# do stuff with your arguments
In the above code, default is a plausible default value for those arguments, or None. You can then call the method with only the arguments you are interested in, and Python will use the default values.
You could also do something like this:
class Character(object):
# your character __init__ and other methods go here
def add_bullet(self, **kwargs):
# here you can unpack kwargs as (key, values) and
# do stuff with them, and use some global dictionary
# to provide default values and ensure that ``key``
# is a valid argument...
# do stuff with your arguments
Another alternative is to directly hook the desired function directly to the class or instance:
def some_implementation(self, arg1, arg2, arg3):
# implementation
my_class.add_bullet = some_implementation_of_add_bullet
Yet another way is to use an abstract factory pattern:
class Character(object):
def __init__(self, bfactory, *args, **kwargs):
self.bfactory = bfactory
def add_bullet(self):
sprite = self.bfactory.sprite()
speed = self.bfactory.speed()
# do stuff with your sprite and speed
class pretty_and_fast_factory(object):
def sprite(self):
return pretty_sprite
def speed(self):
return 10000000000.0
my_character = Character(pretty_and_fast_factory(), a1, a2, kw1=v1, kw2=v2)
my_character.add_bullet() # uses pretty_and_fast_factory
# now, if you have another factory called "ugly_and_slow_factory"
# you can change it at runtime in python by issuing
my_character.bfactory = ugly_and_slow_factory()
# In the last example you can see abstract factory and "method
# overloading" (as you call it) in action
You can use "roll-your-own" solution for function overloading. This one is copied from Guido van Rossum's article about multimethods (because there is little difference between multimethods and overloading in Python):
registry = {}
class MultiMethod(object):
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
self.typemap = {}
def __call__(self, *args):
types = tuple(arg.__class__ for arg in args) # a generator expression!
function = self.typemap.get(types)
if function is None:
raise TypeError("no match")
return function(*args)
def register(self, types, function):
if types in self.typemap:
raise TypeError("duplicate registration")
self.typemap[types] = function
def multimethod(*types):
def register(function):
name = function.__name__
mm = registry.get(name)
if mm is None:
mm = registry[name] = MultiMethod(name)
mm.register(types, function)
return mm
return register
The usage would be
from multimethods import multimethod
import unittest
# 'overload' makes more sense in this case
overload = multimethod
class Sprite(object):
pass
class Point(object):
pass
class Curve(object):
pass
#overload(Sprite, Point, Direction, int)
def add_bullet(sprite, start, direction, speed):
# ...
#overload(Sprite, Point, Point, int, int)
def add_bullet(sprite, start, headto, speed, acceleration):
# ...
#overload(Sprite, str)
def add_bullet(sprite, script):
# ...
#overload(Sprite, Curve, speed)
def add_bullet(sprite, curve, speed):
# ...
Most restrictive limitations at the moment are:
methods are not supported, only functions that are not class members;
inheritance is not handled;
kwargs are not supported;
registering new functions should be done at import time thing is not thread-safe
A possible option is to use the multipledispatch module as detailed here:
http://matthewrocklin.com/blog/work/2014/02/25/Multiple-Dispatch
Instead of doing this:
def add(self, other):
if isinstance(other, Foo):
...
elif isinstance(other, Bar):
...
else:
raise NotImplementedError()
You can do this:
from multipledispatch import dispatch
#dispatch(int, int)
def add(x, y):
return x + y
#dispatch(object, object)
def add(x, y):
return "%s + %s" % (x, y)
With the resulting usage:
>>> add(1, 2)
3
>>> add(1, 'hello')
'1 + hello'
In Python 3.4 PEP-0443. Single-dispatch generic functions was added.
Here is a short API description from PEP.
To define a generic function, decorate it with the #singledispatch decorator. Note that the dispatch happens on the type of the first argument. Create your function accordingly:
from functools import singledispatch
#singledispatch
def fun(arg, verbose=False):
if verbose:
print("Let me just say,", end=" ")
print(arg)
To add overloaded implementations to the function, use the register() attribute of the generic function. This is a decorator, taking a type parameter and decorating a function implementing the operation for that type:
#fun.register(int)
def _(arg, verbose=False):
if verbose:
print("Strength in numbers, eh?", end=" ")
print(arg)
#fun.register(list)
def _(arg, verbose=False):
if verbose:
print("Enumerate this:")
for i, elem in enumerate(arg):
print(i, elem)
The #overload decorator was added with type hints (PEP 484).
While this doesn't change the behaviour of Python, it does make it easier to understand what is going on, and for mypy to detect errors.
See: Type hints and PEP 484
This type of behaviour is typically solved (in OOP languages) using polymorphism. Each type of bullet would be responsible for knowing how it travels. For instance:
class Bullet(object):
def __init__(self):
self.curve = None
self.speed = None
self.acceleration = None
self.sprite_image = None
class RegularBullet(Bullet):
def __init__(self):
super(RegularBullet, self).__init__()
self.speed = 10
class Grenade(Bullet):
def __init__(self):
super(Grenade, self).__init__()
self.speed = 4
self.curve = 3.5
add_bullet(Grendade())
def add_bullet(bullet):
c_function(bullet.speed, bullet.curve, bullet.acceleration, bullet.sprite, bullet.x, bullet.y)
void c_function(double speed, double curve, double accel, char[] sprite, ...) {
if (speed != null && ...) regular_bullet(...)
else if (...) curved_bullet(...)
//..etc..
}
Pass as many arguments to the c_function that exist, and then do the job of determining which c function to call based on the values in the initial c function. So, Python should only ever be calling the one c function. That one c function looks at the arguments, and then can delegate to other c functions appropriately.
You're essentially just using each subclass as a different data container, but by defining all the potential arguments on the base class, the subclasses are free to ignore the ones they do nothing with.
When a new type of bullet comes along, you can simply define one more property on the base, change the one python function so that it passes the extra property, and the one c_function that examines the arguments and delegates appropriately. It doesn't sound too bad I guess.
It is impossible by definition to overload a function in python (read on for details), but you can achieve something similar with a simple decorator
class overload:
def __init__(self, f):
self.cases = {}
def args(self, *args):
def store_function(f):
self.cases[tuple(args)] = f
return self
return store_function
def __call__(self, *args):
function = self.cases[tuple(type(arg) for arg in args)]
return function(*args)
You can use it like this
#overload
def f():
pass
#f.args(int, int)
def f(x, y):
print('two integers')
#f.args(float)
def f(x):
print('one float')
f(5.5)
f(1, 2)
Modify it to adapt it to your use case.
A clarification of concepts
function dispatch: there are multiple functions with the same name. Which one should be called? two strategies
static/compile-time dispatch (aka. "overloading"). decide which function to call based on the compile-time type of the arguments. In all dynamic languages, there is no compile-time type, so overloading is impossible by definition
dynamic/run-time dispatch: decide which function to call based on the runtime type of the arguments. This is what all OOP languages do: multiple classes have the same methods, and the language decides which one to call based on the type of self/this argument. However, most languages only do it for the this argument only. The above decorator extends the idea to multiple parameters.
To clear up, assume that we define, in a hypothetical static language, the functions
void f(Integer x):
print('integer called')
void f(Float x):
print('float called')
void f(Number x):
print('number called')
Number x = new Integer('5')
f(x)
x = new Number('3.14')
f(x)
With static dispatch (overloading) you will see "number called" twice, because x has been declared as Number, and that's all overloading cares about. With dynamic dispatch you will see "integer called, float called", because those are the actual types of x at the time the function is called.
By passing keyword args.
def add_bullet(**kwargs):
#check for the arguments listed above and do the proper things
Python 3.8 added functools.singledispatchmethod
Transform a method into a single-dispatch generic function.
To define a generic method, decorate it with the #singledispatchmethod
decorator. Note that the dispatch happens on the type of the first
non-self or non-cls argument, create your function accordingly:
from functools import singledispatchmethod
class Negator:
#singledispatchmethod
def neg(self, arg):
raise NotImplementedError("Cannot negate a")
#neg.register
def _(self, arg: int):
return -arg
#neg.register
def _(self, arg: bool):
return not arg
negator = Negator()
for v in [42, True, "Overloading"]:
neg = negator.neg(v)
print(f"{v=}, {neg=}")
Output
v=42, neg=-42
v=True, neg=False
NotImplementedError: Cannot negate a
#singledispatchmethod supports nesting with other decorators such as
#classmethod. Note that to allow for dispatcher.register,
singledispatchmethod must be the outer most decorator. Here is the
Negator class with the neg methods being class bound:
from functools import singledispatchmethod
class Negator:
#singledispatchmethod
#staticmethod
def neg(arg):
raise NotImplementedError("Cannot negate a")
#neg.register
def _(arg: int) -> int:
return -arg
#neg.register
def _(arg: bool) -> bool:
return not arg
for v in [42, True, "Overloading"]:
neg = Negator.neg(v)
print(f"{v=}, {neg=}")
Output:
v=42, neg=-42
v=True, neg=False
NotImplementedError: Cannot negate a
The same pattern can be used for other similar decorators:
staticmethod, abstractmethod, and others.
I think your basic requirement is to have a C/C++-like syntax in Python with the least headache possible. Although I liked Alexander Poluektov's answer it doesn't work for classes.
The following should work for classes. It works by distinguishing by the number of non-keyword arguments (but it doesn't support distinguishing by type):
class TestOverloading(object):
def overloaded_function(self, *args, **kwargs):
# Call the function that has the same number of non-keyword arguments.
getattr(self, "_overloaded_function_impl_" + str(len(args)))(*args, **kwargs)
def _overloaded_function_impl_3(self, sprite, start, direction, **kwargs):
print "This is overload 3"
print "Sprite: %s" % str(sprite)
print "Start: %s" % str(start)
print "Direction: %s" % str(direction)
def _overloaded_function_impl_2(self, sprite, script):
print "This is overload 2"
print "Sprite: %s" % str(sprite)
print "Script: "
print script
And it can be used simply like this:
test = TestOverloading()
test.overloaded_function("I'm a Sprite", 0, "Right")
print
test.overloaded_function("I'm another Sprite", "while x == True: print 'hi'")
Output:
This is overload 3
Sprite: I'm a Sprite
Start: 0
Direction: Right
This is overload 2
Sprite: I'm another Sprite
Script:
while x == True: print 'hi'
You can achieve this with the following Python code:
#overload
def test(message: str):
return message
#overload
def test(number: int):
return number + 1
Either use multiple keyword arguments in the definition, or create a Bullet hierarchy whose instances are passed to the function.
I think a Bullet class hierarchy with the associated polymorphism is the way to go. You can effectively overload the base class constructor by using a metaclass so that calling the base class results in the creation of the appropriate subclass object. Below is some sample code to illustrate the essence of what I mean.
Updated
The code has been modified to run under both Python 2 and 3 to keep it relevant. This was done in a way that avoids the use Python's explicit metaclass syntax, which varies between the two versions.
To accomplish that objective, a BulletMetaBase instance of the BulletMeta class is created by explicitly calling the metaclass when creating the Bullet baseclass (rather than using the __metaclass__= class attribute or via a metaclass keyword argument depending on the Python version).
class BulletMeta(type):
def __new__(cls, classname, bases, classdict):
""" Create Bullet class or a subclass of it. """
classobj = type.__new__(cls, classname, bases, classdict)
if classname != 'BulletMetaBase':
if classname == 'Bullet': # Base class definition?
classobj.registry = {} # Initialize subclass registry.
else:
try:
alias = classdict['alias']
except KeyError:
raise TypeError("Bullet subclass %s has no 'alias'" %
classname)
if alias in Bullet.registry: # unique?
raise TypeError("Bullet subclass %s's alias attribute "
"%r already in use" % (classname, alias))
# Register subclass under the specified alias.
classobj.registry[alias] = classobj
return classobj
def __call__(cls, alias, *args, **kwargs):
""" Bullet subclasses instance factory.
Subclasses should only be instantiated by calls to the base
class with their subclass' alias as the first arg.
"""
if cls != Bullet:
raise TypeError("Bullet subclass %r objects should not to "
"be explicitly constructed." % cls.__name__)
elif alias not in cls.registry: # Bullet subclass?
raise NotImplementedError("Unknown Bullet subclass %r" %
str(alias))
# Create designated subclass object (call its __init__ method).
subclass = cls.registry[alias]
return type.__call__(subclass, *args, **kwargs)
class Bullet(BulletMeta('BulletMetaBase', (object,), {})):
# Presumably you'd define some abstract methods that all here
# that would be supported by all subclasses.
# These definitions could just raise NotImplementedError() or
# implement the functionality is some sub-optimal generic way.
# For example:
def fire(self, *args, **kwargs):
raise NotImplementedError(self.__class__.__name__ + ".fire() method")
# Abstract base class's __init__ should never be called.
# If subclasses need to call super class's __init__() for some
# reason then it would need to be implemented.
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
raise NotImplementedError("Bullet is an abstract base class")
# Subclass definitions.
class Bullet1(Bullet):
alias = 'B1'
def __init__(self, sprite, start, direction, speed):
print('creating %s object' % self.__class__.__name__)
def fire(self, trajectory):
print('Bullet1 object fired with %s trajectory' % trajectory)
class Bullet2(Bullet):
alias = 'B2'
def __init__(self, sprite, start, headto, spead, acceleration):
print('creating %s object' % self.__class__.__name__)
class Bullet3(Bullet):
alias = 'B3'
def __init__(self, sprite, script): # script controlled bullets
print('creating %s object' % self.__class__.__name__)
class Bullet4(Bullet):
alias = 'B4'
def __init__(self, sprite, curve, speed): # for bullets with curved paths
print('creating %s object' % self.__class__.__name__)
class Sprite: pass
class Curve: pass
b1 = Bullet('B1', Sprite(), (10,20,30), 90, 600)
b2 = Bullet('B2', Sprite(), (-30,17,94), (1,-1,-1), 600, 10)
b3 = Bullet('B3', Sprite(), 'bullet42.script')
b4 = Bullet('B4', Sprite(), Curve(), 720)
b1.fire('uniform gravity')
b2.fire('uniform gravity')
Output:
creating Bullet1 object
creating Bullet2 object
creating Bullet3 object
creating Bullet4 object
Bullet1 object fired with uniform gravity trajectory
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "python-function-overloading.py", line 93, in <module>
b2.fire('uniform gravity') # NotImplementedError: Bullet2.fire() method
File "python-function-overloading.py", line 49, in fire
raise NotImplementedError(self.__class__.__name__ + ".fire() method")
NotImplementedError: Bullet2.fire() method
You can easily implement function overloading in Python. Here is an example using floats and integers:
class OverloadedFunction:
def __init__(self):
self.router = {int : self.f_int ,
float: self.f_float}
def __call__(self, x):
return self.router[type(x)](x)
def f_int(self, x):
print('Integer Function')
return x**2
def f_float(self, x):
print('Float Function (Overloaded)')
return x**3
# f is our overloaded function
f = OverloadedFunction()
print(f(3 ))
print(f(3.))
# Output:
# Integer Function
# 9
# Float Function (Overloaded)
# 27.0
The main idea behind the code is that a class holds the different (overloaded) functions that you would like to implement, and a Dictionary works as a router, directing your code towards the right function depending on the input type(x).
PS1. In case of custom classes, like Bullet1, you can initialize the internal dictionary following a similar pattern, such as self.D = {Bullet1: self.f_Bullet1, ...}. The rest of the code is the same.
PS2. The time/space complexity of the proposed solution is fairly good as well, with an average cost of O(1) per operation.
Use keyword arguments with defaults. E.g.
def add_bullet(sprite, start=default, direction=default, script=default, speed=default):
In the case of a straight bullet versus a curved bullet, I'd add two functions: add_bullet_straight and add_bullet_curved.
Overloading methods is tricky in Python. However, there could be usage of passing the dict, list or primitive variables.
I have tried something for my use cases, and this could help here to understand people to overload the methods.
Let's take your example:
A class overload method with call the methods from different class.
def add_bullet(sprite=None, start=None, headto=None, spead=None, acceleration=None):
Pass the arguments from the remote class:
add_bullet(sprite = 'test', start=Yes,headto={'lat':10.6666,'long':10.6666},accelaration=10.6}
Or
add_bullet(sprite = 'test', start=Yes, headto={'lat':10.6666,'long':10.6666},speed=['10','20,'30']}
So, handling is being achieved for list, Dictionary or primitive variables from method overloading.
Try it out for your code.
Plum supports it in a straightforward pythonic way. Copying an example from the README below.
from plum import dispatch
#dispatch
def f(x: str):
return "This is a string!"
#dispatch
def f(x: int):
return "This is an integer!"
>>> f("1")
'This is a string!'
>>> f(1)
'This is an integer!'
You can also try this code. We can try any number of arguments
# Finding the average of given number of arguments
def avg(*args): # args is the argument name we give
sum = 0
for i in args:
sum += i
average = sum/len(args) # Will find length of arguments we given
print("Avg: ", average)
# call function with different number of arguments
avg(1,2)
avg(5,6,4,7)
avg(11,23,54,111,76)

Python DRY class inititialization [duplicate]

When I define a class, I often want to set a collection of attributes for that class upon object creation. Until now, I have done so by passing the attributes as arguments to the init method. However, I have been unhappy with the repetitive nature of such code:
class Repository(OrderedDict,UserOwnedObject,Describable):
def __init__(self,user,name,gitOriginURI=None,gitCommitHash=None,temporary=False,sourceDir=None):
self.name = name
self.gitOriginURI = gitOriginURI
self.gitCommitHash = gitCommitHash
self.temporary = temporary
self.sourceDir = sourceDir
...
In this example, I have to type name three times, gitOriginURI three times, gitCommitHash three times, temporary three times, and sourceDir three times. Just to set these attributes. This is extremely boring code to write.
I've considered changing classes like this to be along the lines of:
class Foo():
def __init__(self):
self.a = None
self.b = None
self.c = None
And initializing their objects like:
f = Foo()
f.a = whatever
f.b = something_else
f.c = cheese
But from a documentation standpoint, this seems worse, because the user of the class then needs to know which attributes need to be set, rather than simply looking at the autogenerated help() string for the class's initializer.
Are there any better ways to do this?
One thing that I think might be an interesting solution, would be if there was a store_args_to_self() method which would store every argument passed to init as an attribute to self. Does such a method exist?
One thing that makes me pessimistic about this quest for a better way, is that looking at the source code for the date object in cPython's source, for example, I see this same repetitive code:
def __new__(cls, year, month=None, day=None):
...
self._year = year
self._month = month
self._day = day
https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/master/Lib/datetime.py#L705
And urwid, though slightly obfuscated by the use of setters, also has such "take an argument and set it as an attribute to self" hot-potato code:
def __init__(self, caption=u"", edit_text=u"", multiline=False,
align=LEFT, wrap=SPACE, allow_tab=False,
edit_pos=None, layout=None, mask=None):
...
self.__super.__init__("", align, wrap, layout)
self.multiline = multiline
self.allow_tab = allow_tab
self._edit_pos = 0
self.set_caption(caption)
self.set_edit_text(edit_text)
if edit_pos is None:
edit_pos = len(edit_text)
self.set_edit_pos(edit_pos)
self.set_mask(mask)
https://github.com/urwid/urwid/blob/master/urwid/widget.py#L1158
You could use the dataclasses project to have it take care of generating the __init__ method for you; it'll also take care of a representation, hashing and equality testing (and optionally, rich comparisons and immutability):
from dataclasses import dataclass
from typing import Optional
#dataclass
class Repository(OrderedDict, UserOwnedObject, Describable):
name: str
gitOriginURI: Optional[str] = None
gitCommitHash: Optional[str] = None
temporary: bool = False
sourceDir: Optional[str] = None
dataclasses were defined in PEP 557 - Data Classes, which has been accepted for inclusion in Python 3.7. The library will work on Python 3.6 and up (as it relies on the new variable annotation syntax introduced in 3.6).
The project was inspired by the attrs project, which offers some more flexibility and options still, as well as compatibility with Python 2.7 and Python 3.4 and up.
Well, you could do this:
class Foo:
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
self.__dict__.update(kwargs)
foo = Foo(a=1, b='two', c='iii')
print(foo.a, foo.b, foo.c)
output
1 two iii
But if you do, it's probably a Good Idea to check that the keys in kwargs are sane before dumping them into your instances __dict__. ;)
Here's a slightly fancier example that does a little bit of checking of the passed-in args.
class Foo:
attrs = ['a', 'b', 'c']
''' Some stuff about a, b, & c '''
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
valid = {key: kwargs.get(key) for key in self.attrs}
self.__dict__.update(valid)
def __repr__(self):
args = ', '.join(['{}={}'.format(key, getattr(self, key)) for key in self.attrs])
return 'Foo({})'.format(args)
foo = Foo(a=1, c='iii', d='four')
print(foo)
output
Foo(a=1, b=None, c=iii)
For Python 2.7 my solution is to inherit from namedtuple and use namedtuple itself as only argument to init. To avoid overloading new every time we can use decorator. The advantage is that we have explicit init signature w/o *args, **kwargs and, so, nice IDE suggestions
def nt_child(c):
def __new__(cls, p): return super(c, cls).__new__(cls, *p)
c.__new__ = staticmethod(__new__)
return c
ClassA_P = namedtuple('ClassA_P', 'a, b, foo, bar')
#nt_child
class ClassA(ClassA_P):
def __init__(self, p):
super(ClassA, self).__init__(*p)
self.something_more = sum(p)
a = ClassA(ClassA_P(1,2,3,4)) # a = ClassA(ClassA_P( <== suggestion a, b, foo, bar
print a.something_more # print a. <== suggesion a, b, foo, bar, something_more
I'll just leave another one recipe here. attrs is useful, but have cons, main of which is lack of IDE suggestions for class __init__.
Also it's fun to have initialization chains, where we use instance of parent class as first arg for __init__ instead of providing all it's attrs one by one.
So I propose the simple decorator. It analyses __init__ signature and automatically adds class attributes, based on it (so approach is opposite to attrs's one). This gave us nice IDE suggestions for __init__ (but lack of suggestions on attributes itself).
Usage:
#data_class
class A:
def __init__(self, foo, bar): pass
#data_class
class B(A):
# noinspection PyMissingConstructor
def __init__(self, a, red, fox):
self.red_plus_fox = red + fox
# do not call parent constructor, decorator will do it for you
a = A(1, 2)
print a.__attrs__ # {'foo': 1, 'bar': 2}
b = B(a, 3, 4) # {'fox': 4, 'foo': 1, 'bar': 2, 'red': 3, 'red_plus_fox': 7}
print b.__attrs__
Source:
from collections import OrderedDict
def make_call_dict(f, is_class_method, *args, **kwargs):
vnames = f.__code__.co_varnames[int(is_class_method):f.__code__.co_argcount]
defs = f.__defaults__ or []
d = OrderedDict(zip(vnames, [None] * len(vnames)))
d.update({vn: d for vn, d in zip(vnames[-len(defs):], defs)})
d.update(kwargs)
d.update({vn: v for vn, v in zip(vnames, args)})
return d
def data_class(cls):
inherited = hasattr(cls, '_fields')
if not inherited: setattr(cls, '_fields', None)
__init__old__ = cls.__init__
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
d = make_call_dict(__init__old__, True, *args, **kwargs)
if inherited:
# tricky call of parent __init__
O = cls.__bases__[0] # put parent dataclass first in inheritance list
o = d.values()[0] # first arg in my __init__ is parent class object
d = OrderedDict(d.items()[1:])
isg = o._fields[O] # parent __init__ signature, [0] shows is he expect data object as first arg
O.__init__(self, *(([o] if isg[0] else []) + [getattr(o, f) for f in isg[1:]]))
else:
self._fields = {}
self.__dict__.update(d)
self._fields.update({cls: [inherited] + d.keys()})
__init__old__(self, *args, **kwargs)
cls.__attrs__ = property(lambda self: {k: v for k, v in self.__dict__.items()
if not k.startswith('_')})
cls.__init__ = __init__
return cls

Calling classmethod multiple times in python

I am trying to create a classmethod which can be called again and again, however it only works once and stops. Here is the code:
class NewBytes(bytes):
def __init__(self, var):
self.var= var
#classmethod
def rip(cls):
return cls(var[2:])
a = b"12asd5789"
x = NewBytes(a)
print(x, x.rip(), x.rip().rip(), x.rip().rip().rip())
Here is what I got from this:
b'12asd5789' b'asd5789' b'asd5789' b'asd5789'
However, what I want to have is:
b'12asd5789' b'asd5789' b'd5789' b'789'
Thanks in advance.
Probably you don't actually want a class method, since you need access to instance state here.
class NewBytes(bytes):
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
def rip(self):
return type(self)(self.x[2:])
My previous answer of using self.x doesnt make sense since this is a class method (too quick to answer). I think this is a case of the XY problem, see the below example of how to use a class method.
class Test(object):
x = "hey there whats up this is a long string"
#classmethod
def TestFunction(cls):
cls.x = cls.x[3:]
print(cls.x)
print(Test().x)
Test().TestFunction()
Test().TestFunction()
Test().TestFunction()
Test().TestFunction()
Test().TestFunction()

Resources