Im new to OOP in Python (and in general) and wondering about the correct way to change object variables. Since Python cant return void i need to return something when an object variable has changed.
class classA:
var_a = 1
var_b = 1
def changeSomething(classAObj):
classAObj.var_a = 2
return classAobj
def main()
classAObj = classA()
changeSomething(classAObj)
.....use object with new changes here....
Is it correct to return the entire classAObj in the changeSomething function? Or should i only return the variable i.e
...
return classAobj.var_a
I get the same result in either way, classAObj.var_a has changed in both cases, but what is the correct way to do it?
changeSomething should not return anything; when it modifies the argument in place, it should return nothing (implicitly None). Only functions that make new modified copies should return them (and leave the argument unmodified).
So your code should just be:
class classA:
def __init__(self):
self.var_a = 1 # You forget self here
self.var_b = 1 # You forget self here
def changeSomething(classAObj):
classAObj.var_a = 2 # Fix name, self wouldn't exist, you received it by a different name
def main():
classAObj = classA()
changeSomething(classAObj) # classAObj is modified in place, so changes seen in caller
# .....use object with new changes here....
Or, given this is a class, it makes sense to have changeSomething be an instance method, e.g.:
class classA:
def __init__(self):
self.var_a = 1 # You forget self here
self.var_b = 1 # You forget self here
# Indented to make it a method of the class
def changeSomething(self): # Argument renamed to follow standard naming for instance methods
self.var_a = 2
def main():
classAObj = classA()
classAObj.changeSomething() # Use method call syntax, classAObj still modified in place
# .....use object with new changes here....
Related
I would like to replace an object instance by another instance inside a method like this:
class A:
def method1(self):
self = func(self)
The object is retrieved from a database.
It is unlikely that replacing the 'self' variable will accomplish whatever you're trying to do, that couldn't just be accomplished by storing the result of func(self) in a different variable. 'self' is effectively a local variable only defined for the duration of the method call, used to pass in the instance of the class which is being operated upon. Replacing self will not actually replace references to the original instance of the class held by other objects, nor will it create a lasting reference to the new instance which was assigned to it.
As far as I understand, If you are trying to replace the current object with another object of same type (assuming func won't change the object type) from an member function. I think this will achieve that:
class A:
def method1(self):
newObj = func(self)
self.__dict__.update(newObj.__dict__)
It is not a direct answer to the question, but in the posts below there's a solution for what amirouche tried to do:
Python object conversion
Can I dynamically convert an instance of one class to another?
And here's working code sample (Python 3.2.5).
class Men:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def who_are_you(self):
print("I'm a men! My name is " + self.name)
def cast_to(self, sex, name):
self.__class__ = sex
self.name = name
def method_unique_to_men(self):
print('I made The Matrix')
class Women:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def who_are_you(self):
print("I'm a women! My name is " + self.name)
def cast_to(self, sex, name):
self.__class__ = sex
self.name = name
def method_unique_to_women(self):
print('I made Cloud Atlas')
men = Men('Larry')
men.who_are_you()
#>>> I'm a men! My name is Larry
men.method_unique_to_men()
#>>> I made The Matrix
men.cast_to(Women, 'Lana')
men.who_are_you()
#>>> I'm a women! My name is Lana
men.method_unique_to_women()
#>>> I made Cloud Atlas
Note the self.__class__ and not self.__class__.__name__. I.e. this technique not only replaces class name, but actually converts an instance of a class (at least both of them have same id()). Also, 1) I don't know whether it is "safe to replace a self object by another object of the same type in [an object own] method"; 2) it works with different types of objects, not only with ones that are of the same type; 3) it works not exactly like amirouche wanted: you can't init class like Class(args), only Class() (I'm not a pro and can't answer why it's like this).
Yes, all that will happen is that you won't be able to reference the current instance of your class A (unless you set another variable to self before you change it.) I wouldn't recommend it though, it makes for less readable code.
Note that you're only changing a variable, just like any other. Doing self = 123 is the same as doing abc = 123. self is only a reference to the current instance within the method. You can't change your instance by setting self.
What func(self) should do is to change the variables of your instance:
def func(obj):
obj.var_a = 123
obj.var_b = 'abc'
Then do this:
class A:
def method1(self):
func(self) # No need to assign self here
In many cases, a good way to achieve what you want is to call __init__ again. For example:
class MyList(list):
def trim(self,n):
self.__init__(self[:-n])
x = MyList([1,2,3,4])
x.trim(2)
assert type(x) == MyList
assert x == [1,2]
Note that this comes with a few assumptions such as the all that you want to change about the object being set in __init__. Also beware that this could cause problems with inheriting classes that redefine __init__ in an incompatible manner.
Yes, there is nothing wrong with this. Haters gonna hate. (Looking at you Pycharm with your in most cases imaginable, there's no point in such reassignment and it indicates an error).
A situation where you could do this is:
some_method(self, ...):
...
if(some_condition):
self = self.some_other_method()
...
return ...
Sure, you could start the method body by reassigning self to some other variable, but if you wouldn't normally do that with other parametres, why do it with self?
One can use the self assignment in a method, to change the class of instance to a derived class.
Of course one could assign it to a new object, but then the use of the new object ripples through the rest of code in the method. Reassiging it to self, leaves the rest of the method untouched.
class aclass:
def methodA(self):
...
if condition:
self = replace_by_derived(self)
# self is now referencing to an instance of a derived class
# with probably the same values for its data attributes
# all code here remains untouched
...
self.methodB() # calls the methodB of derivedclass is condition is True
...
def methodB(self):
# methodB of class aclass
...
class derivedclass(aclass):
def methodB(self):
#methodB of class derivedclass
...
But apart from such a special use case, I don't see any advantages to replace self.
You can make the instance a singleton element of the class
and mark the methods with #classmethod.
from enum import IntEnum
from collections import namedtuple
class kind(IntEnum):
circle = 1
square = 2
def attr(y): return [getattr(y, x) for x in 'k l b u r'.split()]
class Shape(namedtuple('Shape', 'k,l,b,u,r')):
self = None
#classmethod
def __repr__(cls):
return "<Shape({},{},{},{},{}) object at {}>".format(
*(attr(cls.self)+[id(cls.self)]))
#classmethod
def transform(cls, func):
cls.self = cls.self._replace(**func(cls.self))
Shape.self = Shape(k=1, l=2, b=3, u=4, r=5)
s = Shape.self
def nextkind(self):
return {'k': self.k+1}
print(repr(s)) # <Shape(1,2,3,4,5) object at 139766656561792>
s.transform(nextkind)
print(repr(s)) # <Shape(2,2,3,4,5) object at 139766656561888>
I have a class that I need:
First instance MUST receive a parameter.
All the following instances have this parameter be optional.
If it is not passed then I will use the parameter of the previous object init.
For that, I need to share a variable between the objects (all objects belong to classes with the same parent).
For example:
class MyClass:
shared_variable = None
def __init__(self, paremeter_optional=None):
if paremeter_optional is None: # Parameter optional not given
if self.shared_variable is None:
print("Error! First intance must have the parameter")
sys.exit(-1)
else:
paremeter_optional = self.shared_variable # Use last parameter
self.shared_variable = paremeter_optional # Save it for next object
objA = MyClass(3)
objB = MyClass()
Because the shared_variable is not consistent/shared across inits, when running the above code I get the error:
Error! First intance must have the parameter
(After the second init of objB)
Of course, I could use a global variable but I want to avoid it if possible and use some best practices for this.
Update: Having misunderstood the original problem, I would still recommend being explicit, rather than having the class track information better tracked outside the class.
class MyClass:
def __init__(self, parameter):
...
objA = MyClass(3)
objB = MyClass(4)
objC = MyClass(5)
objD = MyClass(5) # Be explicit; don't "remember" what was used for objC
If objC and objD are "related" enough that objD can rely on the initialization of objC, and you want to be DRY, use something like
objC, objD = [MyClass(5) for _ in range(2)]
Original answer:
I wouldn't make this something you set from an instance at all; it's a class attribute, and so should be set at the class level only.
class MyClass:
shared_variable = None
def __init__(self):
if self.shared_variable is None:
raise RuntimeError("shared_variable must be set before instantiating")
...
MyClass.shared_variable = 3
objA = MyClass()
objB = MyClass()
Assigning a value to self.shared_variable makes self.shared_variable an instance attribute so that the value is not shared among instances.
You can instead assign the value explicitly to the class attribute by referencing the attribute of the instance's class object instead.
Change:
self.shared_variable = paremeter_optional
to:
self.__class__.shared_variable = paremeter_optional
I'd like to create a class that has 2 input attributes and 1 output attribute such that whenever one of the input attributes are modified the output attribute is modified automatically
I've tried defining the attributes as instance variables within and outside the constructor function but in either case, after instantiating the object, the output attribute remains fixed at the value set at the moment of instantiation
class Example():
def __init__(self,n):
self.name=n
inA=1
inB=1
if inA==1 and inB==1:
outA=1
else:
outA=0
when instantiated outA is set to 1 as expected
but if I try to update:
object.inA=0
object.outA remains 1 whereas I need it to be updated to 0
Trying to avoid the use of functions if possible. New to python and OOP so sorry if this question is nonsensical or has an obvious answer
If you want instance attributes that depend on other instance attributes, properties are the way to go.
class Example:
def __init__(self, n):
self.name = n
self.inA = 1
self.inB = 1
#property
def outA(self):
return self.inA and self.inB
You access outA like a regular instance attribute, obj.outA.
>>> my_obj = Example("example")
>>> my_obj.outA
1
Changing the attributes inA and inB affect outA.
>>> my_obj.inA = 0
>>> my_obj.outA
0
You can create a function in the class and some other minor changes:
class Example():
def __init__(self,n):
self.name=n
self.inA=1
self.inB=1
def f(self):
if self.inA==1 and self.inB==1:
self.outA=1
else:
self.outA=0
To call it:
a = Example('foo')
a.inA = 0
a.f()
print(a.outA)
Output:
0
As you can see, taking out:
a.f()
line would make it give an error:
AttributeError: 'Example' object has no attribute 'outA'
Do you want it to return your output?
Expanding on U9-Forward's answer:
class Example():
def __init__(self,n):
self.name = n
self.inA = 1
self.inB = 1
def f(self):
return self.inA and self.inB
I am trying to assign a method's return to a variable and stuck with this error.
class MyClass():
def my_def(self):
return "Hello"
my_variable = my_def()
Here is the Java equivalent of what I want to do.
public class NewException {
public int method1(){
return 1;
}
public int variable = method1();
}
I am sure this is something simple, but I couldn't even find the right words to google this. Any help is appreciated.
Lets start with the difference between methods and functions, basically a method belongs to some object while a function does not. So for example
def myFunction():
return "F"
class MyClass:
value = 0
def myMethod(self, value):
old = self.value
self.value = value
return old
myClassInstance = MyClass()
print myClassInstance.myMethod(3)
# 0
print myClassInstance.myMethod(33)
# 3
print myFunction()
# F
Notice that the method is bound to the instance and it doesn't make sense to call the method before the instance is created. With that in mind, your error should make more sense. The method cannot be called without an instance (self). This is not the only kind of method, for example there are "static methods". Static methods are defined on the class, but they are called without an instance. For example:
class MyClass:
#staticmethod
def myStaticMethod():
return "static method"
# Consider using an instance attribute instead of a class attribute
def __init__(self):
self.instance_attribute = MyClass.myStaticMethod()
# Or if you need a class attribute it needs to go outside the class block
MyClass.class_attribute = MyClass.myStaticMethod()
What is the difference between creating a variable using the self.variable syntax and creating one without?
I was testing it out and I can still access both from an instance:
class TestClass(object):
j = 10
def __init__(self):
self.i = 20
if __name__ == '__main__':
testInstance = TestClass()
print testInstance.i
print testInstance.j
However, if I swap the location of the self, it results in an error.
class TestClass(object):
self.j = 10
def __init__(self):
i = 20
if __name__ == '__main__':
testInstance = TestClass()
print testInstance.i
print testInstance.j
>>NameError: name 'self' is not defined
So I gather that self has a special role in initialization.. but, I just don't quite get what it is.
self refers to the current instance of the class. If you declare a variable outside of a function body, you're referring to the class itself, not an instance, and thus all instances of the class will share the same value for that attribute.
In addition, variables declared as part of the class (rather than part of an instance) can be accessed as part of the class itself:
class Foo(object):
a = 1
one = Foo()
two = Foo()
Foo.a = 3
Since this value is class-wide, not only can you read it directly from the class:
print Foo.a # prints 3
But it will also change the value for every instance of the class:
print one.a # prints 3
print two.a # prints 3
Note, however, that this is only the case if you don't override a class variable with an instance variable. For instance, if you created the following:
class Bar(object)
a = 1
def __init__(self):
self.a = 2
and then did the following:
one = Bar()
two = Bar()
two.a = 3
Then you'd get the following results:
print Bar.a # prints "1"
print one.a # prints "2"
print two.a # prints "3"
As noted in the comments, assigning to two.a creates an instance-local entry on that instance, which overrides the a from Bar, hence why Bar.a is still 1 but two.a is 3.
j is a class variable as pointed by Amber. Now, if you come from C++ background, self is akin to the this pointer. While python doesn't deal with pointers, self plays the similar role of referring to current instance of the class.
In the python way, explicit is better than implicit. In C++, the availability of this is conventionally assumed for each class. Python, on the other hand, explicitly passes self as first argument to each of your instance methods.
Hence self is available only inside the scope of your instance methods, making it undefined for the place from which you tried using it.
Since you're made to explicitly pass self to instance methods, you could also call it something else if you want to -
>>> class Foo:
... b = 20
... def __init__(them):
... them.beep = "weee"
...
>>> f = Foo()
>>> f.beep
'weee'