I would like to import all methods from a module with altered names.
For instance, instead of
from module import repetitive_methodA as methodA, \
repetitive_Class1 as Class1, \
repetitive_instance4 as instance4
I'd prefer something along the lines of
from module import * as *-without-"repetitive_"
this is a rephrasing of this clumsy unanswered question, I have not been able to find a solution or similar questions yet.
You can do it this way:
import module
import inspect
for (k,v) in inspect.getmembers(module):
if k.startswith('repetitive_'):
globals()[k.partition("_")[2]] = v
Edit in response to the comment "how is this answer intended to be used?"
Suppose module looks like this:
# module
def repetitive_A():
print ("This is repetitive_A")
def repetitive_B():
print ("This is repetitive_B")
Then after running the rename loop, this code:
A()
B()
produces this output:
This is repetitive_A
This is repetitive_B
What I would do, creating a work-around...
Including you have a file named some_file.py in the current directory, which is composed of...
# some_file.py
def rep_a():
return 1
def rep_b():
return 2
def rep_c():
return 3
When you import something, you create an object on which you call methods. These methods are the classes, variables, functions of your file.
In order to get what you want, I thought It'd be a great idea to just add a new object, containing the original functions you wanted to rename. The function redirect_function() takes an object as first parameter, and will iterate through the methods (in short, which are the functions of your file) of this object : it will, then, create another object which will contain the pointer of the function you wanted to rename at first.
tl;dr : this function will create another object which contains the original function, but the original name of the function will also remain.
See example below. :)
def redirect_function(file_import, suffixe = 'rep_'):
# Lists your functions and method of your file import.
objects = dir(file_import)
for index in range(len(objects)):
# If it begins with the suffixe, create another object that contains our original function.
if objects[index][0:len(suffixe)] == suffixe:
func = eval("file_import.{}".format(objects[index]))
setattr(file_import, objects[index][len(suffixe):], func)
if __name__ == '__main__':
import some_file
redirect_function(some_file)
print some_file.rep_a(), some_file.rep_b(), some_file.rep_c()
print some_file.a(), some_file.b(), some_file.c()
This outputs...
1 2 3
1 2 3
Related
Please note that I have already referred to StackOverflow question here. I post this question to investigate if calling __post_init__ is safe or not. Please check the question till the end.
Check the below code. In step 3 where we load dataclass A from yaml string. Note that it does not call __post_init__ method.
import dataclasses
import yaml
#dataclasses.dataclass
class A:
a: int = 55
def __post_init__(self):
print("__post_init__ got called", self)
print("\n>>>>>>>>>>>> 1: create dataclass object")
a = A(33)
print(a) # print dataclass
print(dataclasses.fields(a))
print("\n>>>>>>>>>>>> 2: dump to yaml")
s = yaml.dump(a)
print(s) # print yaml repr
print("\n>>>>>>>>>>>> 3: create class from str")
a_ = yaml.load(s)
print(a_) # print dataclass loaded from yaml str
print(dataclasses.fields(a_))
The solution that I see for now is calling __-post_init__ on my own at the end like in below code snippet.
a_.__post_init__()
I am not sure if this is safe recreation of yaml serialized dataclass. Also, it will pose a problem when __post_init__ takes kwargs in case when dataclass fields are dataclasses.InitVar type.
This behavior is working as intended. You are dumping an existing object, so when you load it pyyaml intentionally avoids initializing the object again. The direct attributes of the dumped object will be saved even if they are created in __post_init__ because that function runs prior to being dumped. When you want the side effects that come from __post_init__, like the print statement in your example, you will need to ensure that initialization occurs.
There are few ways to accomplish this. You can use either the metaclass or adding constructor/representer approaches described in pyyaml's documentation. You could also manually alter the dumped string in your example to be ''!!python/object/new:' instead of ''!!python/object:'. If your eventual goal is to have the yaml file generated in a different manner, then this might be a solution.
See below for an update to your code that uses the metaclass approach and calls __post_init__ when loading from the dumped class object. The call to cls(**fields) in from_yaml ensures that the object is initialized. yaml.load uses cls.__new__ to create objects tagged with ''!!python/object:' and then loads the saved attributes into the object manually.
import dataclasses
import yaml
#dataclasses.dataclass
class A(yaml.YAMLObject):
a: int = 55
def __post_init__(self):
print("__post_init__ got called", self)
yaml_tag = '!A'
yaml_loader = yaml.SafeLoader
#classmethod
def from_yaml(cls, loader, node):
fields = loader.construct_mapping(node, deep=True)
return cls(**fields)
print("\n>>>>>>>>>>>> 1: create dataclass object")
a = A(33)
print(a) # print dataclass
print(dataclasses.fields(a))
print("\n>>>>>>>>>>>> 2: dump to yaml")
s = yaml.dump(a)
print(s) # print yaml repr
print("\n>>>>>>>>>>>> 3: create class from str")
a_ = yaml.load(s, Loader=A.yaml_loader)
print(a_) # print dataclass loaded from yaml str
print(dataclasses.fields(a_))
I am trying to populate a dictionary with functions along with the name of the function contained in another file of the form:
{'fn_a': function fn_a at 0x000002239BDCB510, 'fn_b': function fn_b at 0x000002239BDCB268}.
I'm currently attempting to do it with a decorator so when the file containing the functions (definitions.py) is imported the dictionary is populated as follows. The problem is that dictionary is cleared once the import is complete.
definitions.py:
from main import formatter
#formatter
def fn_a(arg):
return arg
#formatter
def fn_b(arg):
return arg
main.py:
available_functions = {}
def formatter(func):
# work out function name and write to func_name
func_name=str(func).split()[1]
available_functions[func_name] = func
return func
import definitions
How can I keep the dictionary populated with values after the module import is finished?
I was able to solve the problem using the FunctionType module to return the available functions from the imported module. It doesn't solve the problem within the conditions I specified above, but does work.
from types import FunctionType
available_functions = {}
def formatter(func):
# work out function name and write to func_name
#global available_functions
func_name=str(func).split()[1]
available_functions[func_name] = func
return func
import definitions
funcs=[getattr(definitions, a) for a in dir(definitions)
if isinstance(getattr(definitions, a), FunctionType)]
for i in funcs:
formatter(i)
Ok so I have two files, filename1.py and filename2.py and they both have a function with same name funB. The third file process.py has function that calls function from either files. I seem to be struggling in calling the correct function.
In process.py:
from directoryA.filename1 import funB
from directoryA.filename2 import funB
def funA:
#do stuff to determine which filename and save it in variable named 'd'
d = 'filename2'
# here i want to call funB with *args based on what 'd' is
So i have tried eval() like so:
call_right_funB = eval(d.funB(*args))
but it seems not to work.
Any help is appreciated.
The problem is, you can't use eval() with a combination of a string and a method like that. What you have written is:
call_right_funB = eval('filename'.funB(*args))
What you can do is:
call_right_funB = eval(d + '.funB(*args)')
But this is not very pythonic approach.
I would recommend creating a dictionary switch. Even though you have to import entire module:
import directoryA.filename1
import directoryA.filename2
dic_switch = {1: directoryA.filename1, 2: directoryA.filename2}
switch_variable = 1
call_right_funB = dic_switch[switch_variable].funB(*args)
Hope it helps.
I've just started learning Python recently and the first project I'm making is a text based adventure game however I've run into a problem. I need a function that makes more objects using the class Goblin that are named after a string.
def spawn(name):
title = name
exec("{0} = {1}".format('title', Goblin))
return title, 'spawn'
Essentially, another function calls this function to create another Goblin (a class) using the input name(a string) as the name of the new Goblin.
What I don't under stand though is that when I run the code(using "bill" as the argument), it gives me this error.
bill = <class '__main__.Goblin'>
^
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
Shouldn't my function be equivalent to:
bill = Goblin
When you do this:
exec("{0} = {1}".format('title', Goblin))
format method converts Goblin class by calling default __str__ method which yields <class '__main__.Goblin'>
Do this instead:
exec("{0} = {1}".format('title', 'Goblin'))
Wait! don't to this, just do:
title = Goblin
as it's strictly equivalent (without any security issues :)).
But that will just alias Goblin class to title. No real interest to all this after all (unless you want to create an instance?: title = Goblin())
With your comment: "I want a Goblin that is named after the string which title represents" I get it: you need
exec("{0} = {1}".format(title, 'Goblin()'))
(no quotes for the first arg so the name you're passing is used, and () on the second to create an instance)
Again: this is really a clumsy way of doing it. What if you want to iterate through all your goblins?
It would be much better to create a dictionary:
goblins_dict = dict()
goblins_dict["my_goblin"] = Goblin()
goblins_dict["my_goblin_2"] = Goblin()
and so on...
I had generated a few values and had populated them into a spreadsheet using xlsxwriter. This is how I did it:
class main1():
.
.
.
.
def fun1():
workbook = xlsxwriter.Workbook(self.Output_fold+'Test'+time.strftime("%H_%M_%S_%d_%m_%Y")+'.xlsx')
worksheet_A = workbook.add_worksheet('Sheet_A')
.
.
worksheet_A.write(row,col,<val>)
.
.
workbook.close()
Now, since I had to make multiple writes, and added more complex logic, I decided to have another function introduced fun2 which would write the values accordingly. The new logic requires generating values in fun1 as well as fun2 (by calling another function fun3). So, I decided to replace variables workbook etc with self.workbook and likewise. My modified script looks like this :
main_file.py
import xlsxwriter
import libex
import os
import time
import sys
import string
class main_cls():
def __init__(self):
self.i=0
self.t1=""
self.t2=""
pwd=os.getcwd().split('\\')
base='\\'.join(pwd[0:len(pwd)-1])+'\\'
print base
self.Output_fold=base+"Output\\"
self.Input_fold=base+"Input\\"
self.workbook=xlsxwriter.Workbook(self.Output_fold+'Test_'+time.strftime("%H_%M_%S_%d_%m_%Y")+'.xlsx')
self.worksheet_A = self.workbook.add_worksheet('Sheet_A')
self.worksheet_A.write(self.i,self.i,"Text 1")
self.worksheet_A.write(self.i,self.i+1,"Text 2")
self.i+=1
def fun1(self):
self.t1="1"
self.t2="2"
self.worksheet_A.write(self.i,self.i,self.t1)
self.worksheet_A.write(self.i,self.i+1,self.t2)
self.i+=1
self.eg=libex.exlib()
self.t1=self.eg.gen(0)
self.t2=self.eg.gen(0)
self.fun2()
self.workbook.close()
def fun2(self):
if option==1:
self.fun3()
def fun3(self):
self.t1=self.eg.gen(0)
self.t2=self.eg.gen(1)
self.worksheet_A.write(self.i,self.i,self.t1)
self.worksheet_A.write(self.i,self.i+1,self.t2)
self.i+=1
option=int(sys.argv[1])
if len(sys.argv)==2:
p=main_cls()
if option==1:
p.fun1()
else:
pass
else:
print "Wrong command"
libex.py
class exlib():
def __init__(self):
self.a="duh"
def gen(self,x):
if int(x)==0:
return(self.a)
elif int(x)==1:
self.a=str(self.a+" "+self.a+" "+self.a+" !!!")
return(self.a)
Now, this works in this particular case but in the actual code, it doesn't. The file itself is not getting created in the output directory. Then, I added the following line:
print "Workbook created at path : ",self.workbook.filename
to see if the file is getting created and it surprisingly showed with full path!!!
Where could I be going wrong here and how can I get this fixed?
UPDATE1: I played around a bit with it and found that removing self from self.workbook moving workbook to __init__(self) creates the file with the initial values populated.
UPDATE2: Have replicated my code in a minimal way as suggested. And this one works pretty well!!!
Tried to reproduce, file is being created just fine, maybe you have a problem with the self.Output_fold variable, or with file permissions or with your code editor's file explorer.