We Keep Coding

correct way of extending a class in python

I am given a designated factory of A-type objects. I would like to make a new version of A-type objects that also have the methods in a Mixin class. For reasons that are too long to explain here, I can't use class A(Mixin), I have to use the A_factory. Below I try to give a bare bones example.
I thought naively that it would be sufficient to inherit from Mixin to endow A-type objects with the mixin methods, but the attempts below don't work:
class A: pass
class A_factory:
def __new__(self):
return A()
class Mixin:
def method(self):
print('aha!')
class A_v2(Mixin): # attempt 1
def __new__(cls):
return A_factory()
class A_v3(Mixin): # attempt 2
def __new__(cls):
self = A_factory()
super().__init__(self)
return self
In fact A_v2().method() and A_v3().method() raises AttributeError: 'A' object has no attribute 'method'.
What is the correct way of using A_factory within class A_vn(Mixin) so that A-type objects created by the factory inherit the mixin methods?

There's no obvious reason why you should need __new__ for what you're showing here. There's a nice discussion here on the subject: Why is __init__() always called after __new__()?
If you try the below it should work:
class Mixin:
def method(self):
print('aha!')
class A(Mixin):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
test = A()
test.method()
If you need to use a factory method, it should be a function rather than a class. There's a very good discussion of how to use factory methods here: https://realpython.com/factory-method-python/

How can I refer to the currently being defined class? [duplicate]

For a recursive function we can do:
def f(i):
if i<0: return
print i
f(i-1)
f(10)
However is there a way to do the following thing?
class A:
# do something
some_func(A)
# ...

If I understand your question correctly, you should be able to reference class A within class A by putting the type annotation in quotes. This is called forward reference.
class A:
# do something
def some_func(self, a: 'A')
# ...
See ref below
https://github.com/python/mypy/issues/3661
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJsrxBkV3kc

In Python you cannot reference the class in the class body, although in languages like Ruby you can do it.
In Python instead you can use a class decorator but that will be called once the class has initialized. Another way could be to use metaclass but it depends on what you are trying to achieve.

You can't with the specific syntax you're describing due to the time at which they are evaluated. The reason the example function given works is that the call to f(i-1) within the function body is because the name resolution of f is not performed until the function is actually called. At this point f exists within the scope of execution since the function has already been evaluated. In the case of the class example, the reference to the class name is looked up during while the class definition is still being evaluated. As such, it does not yet exist in the local scope.
Alternatively, the desired behavior can be accomplished using a metaclass like such:
class MetaA(type):
def __init__(cls):
some_func(cls)
class A(object):
__metaclass__=MetaA
# do something
# ...
Using this approach you can perform arbitrary operations on the class object at the time that the class is evaluated.

Maybe you could try calling __class__.
Right now I'm writing a code that calls a class method from within the same class.
It is working well so far.
I'm creating the class methods using something like:
#classmethod
def my_class_method(cls):
return None
And calling then by using:
x = __class__.my_class_method()

It seems most of the answers here are outdated. From python3.7:
from __future__ import annotations
Example:
$ cat rec.py
from __future__ import annotations
class MyList:
def __init__(self,e):
self.data = [e]
def add(self, e):
self.data.append(e)
return self
def score(self, other:MyList):
return len([e
for e in self.data
if e in other.data])
print(MyList(8).add(3).add(4).score(MyList(4).add(9).add(3)))
$ python3.7 rec.py
2

Nope. It works in a function because the function contents are executed at call-time. But the class contents are executed at define-time, at which point the class doesn't exist yet.
It's not normally a problem because you can hack further members into the class after defining it, so you can split up a class definition into multiple parts:
class A(object):
spam= 1
some_func(A)
A.eggs= 2
def _A_scramble(self):
self.spam=self.eggs= 0
A.scramble= _A_scramble
It is, however, pretty unusual to want to call a function on the class in the middle of its own definition. It's not clear what you're trying to do, but chances are you'd be better off with decorators (or the relatively new class decorators).

There isn't a way to do that within the class scope, not unless A was defined to be something else first (and then some_func(A) will do something entirely different from what you expect)
Unless you're doing some sort of stack inspection to add bits to the class, it seems odd why you'd want to do that. Why not just:
class A:
# do something
pass
some_func(A)
That is, run some_func on A after it's been made. Alternately, you could use a class decorator (syntax for it was added in 2.6) or metaclass if you wanted to modify class A somehow. Could you clarify your use case?

If you want to do just a little hacky thing do
class A(object):
...
some_func(A)
If you want to do something more sophisticated you can use a metaclass. A metaclass is responsible for manipulating the class object before it gets fully created. A template would be:
class AType(type):
def __new__(meta, name, bases, dct):
cls = super(AType, meta).__new__(meta, name, bases, dct)
some_func(cls)
return cls
class A(object):
__metaclass__ = AType
...
type is the default metaclass. Instances of metaclasses are classes so __new__ returns a modified instance of (in this case) A.
For more on metaclasses, see http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html#customizing-class-creation.

If the goal is to call a function some_func with the class as an argument, one answer is to declare some_func as a class decorator. Note that the class decorator is called after the class is initialized. It will be passed the class that is being decorated as an argument.
def some_func(cls):
# Do something
print(f"The answer is {cls.x}")
return cls # Don't forget to return the class
#some_func
class A:
x = 1
If you want to pass additional arguments to some_func you have to return a function from the decorator:
def some_other_func(prefix, suffix):
def inner(cls):
print(f"{prefix} {cls.__name__} {suffix}")
return cls
return inner
#some_other_func("Hello", " and goodbye!")
class B:
x = 2
Class decorators can be composed, which results in them being called in the reverse order they are declared:
#some_func
#some_other_func("Hello", "and goodbye!")
class C:
x = 42
The result of which is:
# Hello C and goodbye!
# The answer is 42

What do you want to achieve? It's possible to access a class to tweak its definition using a metaclass, but it's not recommended.
Your code sample can be written simply as:
class A(object):
pass
some_func(A)

If you want to refer to the same object, just use 'self':
class A:
def some_func(self):
another_func(self)
If you want to create a new object of the same class, just do it:
class A:
def some_func(self):
foo = A()
If you want to have access to the metaclass class object (most likely not what you want), again, just do it:
class A:
def some_func(self):
another_func(A) # note that it reads A, not A()

Do remember that in Python, type hinting is just for auto-code completion therefore it helps IDE to infer types and warn user before runtime. In runtime, type hints almost never used(except in some cases) so you can do something like this:
from typing import Any, Optional, NewType
LinkListType = NewType("LinkList", object)
class LinkList:
value: Any
_next: LinkListType
def set_next(self, ll: LinkListType):
self._next = ll
if __name__ == '__main__':
r = LinkList()
r.value = 1
r.set_next(ll=LinkList())
print(r.value)
And as you can see IDE successfully infers it's type as LinkList:
Note: Since the next can be None, hinting this in the type would be better, I just didn't want to confuse OP.
class LinkList:
value: Any
next: Optional[LinkListType]

It's ok to reference the name of the class inside its body (like inside method definitions) if it's actually in scope... Which it will be if it's defined at top level. (In other cases probably not, due to Python scoping quirks!).
For on illustration of the scoping gotcha, try to instantiate Foo:
class Foo(object):
class Bar(object):
def __init__(self):
self.baz = Bar.baz
baz = 15
def __init__(self):
self.bar = Foo.Bar()
(It's going to complain about the global name 'Bar' not being defined.)
Also, something tells me you may want to look into class methods: docs on the classmethod function (to be used as a decorator), a relevant SO question. Edit: Ok, so this suggestion may not be appropriate at all... It's just that the first thing I thought about when reading your question was stuff like alternative constructors etc. If something simpler suits your needs, steer clear of #classmethod weirdness. :-)

Most code in the class will be inside method definitions, in which case you can simply use the name A.

Learning Python: implementing a virtual method

First day learning Python, please excuse the basic question.
Assuming I have been given an object which contains an unimplemented method that I need to implement, e.g:
class myclass():
def __init__(self)
self.unimplementedmethod = False
What is the correct way to implement this in an instantiated object? I do not want to alter the base class in any way.
I have experimented and found the following code seems to work, but is it correct/good style?
def methodimplementation():
print("method called")
myobject = myclass()
myobject.unimplementedmethod=methodimplementation
Is this the right path? Or should I be doing something different like perhaps creating a derived class first, implementing the methods in it, and then instantiating an object based on the derived class? What is best practice?

You need to subclass the base class:
class myclass():
def some_method():
raise NotImplementedError
class my_subclass(myclass):
def some_method():
print("method called")

You want to create a abstract base class. For that, you need to inherit abc.ABCMeta in your base class. Then defining the method as abstract, you need to decorate it with #abstractmethod. For example:
from abc import ABCMeta, abstractmethod
class BaseClass(ABCMeta):
#abstractmethod
def my_method():
pass
Then you may create the child class as:
class MyChildClass(BaseClass):
def my_method():
print 'my method'

The good way is using subclasses, but if you can't do it, here is a way to access to self from a simple function not defined in a class:
class Bar:
def __init__(self):
pass
def foo(self):
try:
self._foo(self)
except AttributeError:
raise NotImplementedError
def set_foo(self, function):
setattr(self, '_foo', function)
def another_method(self):
print "Another method from {}".format(self)
def foo(self):
self.another_method()
bar = Bar()
bar.set_foo(foo)
bar.foo()
So, def foo(self) define a function with a single argument self, like a method. This function call a instance method another_method.
Bar.set_foo create a new attribute _foo in instance of Bar.
Finally, Bar.foo try to access to self._foo with self as argument. If _foo is do not exists, Bar.foo will raise a NotImplementedError as expected.
Like it you can access to self from foo without subclasses.

How do I get a reference for the current class object?

In Python, how do I get a reference to the current class object within a class statement? Example:
def setup_class_members(cls, prefix):
setattr(cls, prefix+"_var1", "hello")
setattr(cls, prefix+"_var2", "goodbye")
class myclass(object):
setup_class_members(cls, "coffee") # How to get "cls"?
def mytest(self):
print(self.coffee_var1)
print(self.coffee_var2)
x = myclass()
x.mytest()
>>> hello
>>> goodbye
Alternatives that I've written off are:
Use locals(): This gives a dict in a class statement that can be written to. This seems to work for classes, however the documentation tells you not to do this. (I might be tempted to go with this alternative if someone can assure me that this will continue to work for some time.)
Add members to the class object after the class statement: My actual application is to derive a PyQt4 QWidget class with dynamically created pyqtProperty class attributes. QWidget is unusual in that it has a custom metaclass. Very roughly, the metaclass compiles a list of pyqtProperties and stores it as additional member. For this reason, properties that are added to the class after creation have no effect. An example to clear this up:
from PyQt4 import QtCore, QtGui
# works
class MyWidget1(QtGui.QWidget):
myproperty = QtCore.pyqtProperty(int)
# doesn't work because QWidget's metaclass doesn't get to "compile" myproperty
class MyWidget2(QtGui.QWidget):
pass
MyWidget2.myproperty = QtCore.pyqtProperty(int)
Please note that the above will work for most programming cases; my case just happens to be one of those unusual corner cases.

For Python 3, the class must be declared as
class myclass(object, metaclass = Meta):
prefix = "coffee"
...
A few other points:
The metaclass may be a callable, not just a class (Python 2&3)
If the base class of your class already has a non-standard metaclass, you have to make sure you call it's __init__() and __new__() methods instead of type's.
The class statement accepts keyword parameters that are passed on to the metaclass (Python 3 only)
A rewrite of mouad's solution in Python 3 using all of the above is...
def MetaFun(name, bases, attr, prefix=None):
if prefix:
attr[prefix+"_var1"] = "hello"
attr[prefix+"_var2"] = "goodbye"
return object.__class__(name, bases, attr)
class myclass(object, metaclass = MetaFun, prefix="coffee"):
def mytest(self):
print(self.coffee_var1)
print(self.coffee_var2)

AFAIK there is two way to do what you want:
Using metaclass, this will create your two variables in class creation time (which i think is what you want):
class Meta(type):
def __new__(mcs, name, bases, attr):
prefix = attr.get("prefix")
if prefix:
attr[prefix+"_var1"] = "hello"
attr[prefix+"_var2"] = "goodbye"
return type.__new__(mcs, name, bases, attr)
class myclass(object):
__metaclass__ = Meta
prefix = "coffee"
def mytest(self):
print(self.coffee_var1)
print(self.coffee_var2)
Create your two class variable in instantiation time:
class myclass(object):
prefix = "coffee"
def __init__(self):
setattr(self.__class__, self.prefix+"_var1", "hello")
setattr(self.__class__, self.prefix+"_var2", "goodbye")
def mytest(self):
print(self.coffee_var1)
print(self.coffee_var2)
N.B: I'm not sure what you want to achieve because if you want to create dynamic variables depending on the prefix variable why are you accessing like you do in your mytest method ?! i hope it was just an example.

Two more approaches you might use:
A class decorator.
def setup_class_members(prefix):
def decorator(cls):
setattr(cls, prefix+"_var1", "hello")
setattr(cls, prefix+"_var2", "goodbye")
return cls
return decorator
#setup_class_members("coffee")
class myclass(object):
# ... etc
Especially if you need to add attributes in various combinations, the decorator approach is nice because it does not have any effect on inheritance.
If you are dealing with a small set of of attributes that you wish to combine in various ways, you can use mixin classes. A mixin class is a regular class, it's just intended to "mix in" various attributes to some other class.
class coffee_mixin(object):
coffee_var1 = "hello"
coffee_var2 = "goodbye"
class tea_mixin(object):
tea_var1 = "good morning old bean"
tea_var2 = "pip pip cheerio"
class myclass(coffee_mixin, tea_mixin):
# ... etc

See zope.interface.declarations._implements for an example of doing this kind of magic. Just be warned that it's a serious maintainability and portability risk.

Using the docstring from one method to automatically overwrite that of another method

The problem: I have a class which contains a template method execute which calls another method _execute. Subclasses are supposed to overwrite _execute to implement some specific functionality. This functionality should be documented in the docstring of _execute.
Advanced users can create their own subclasses to extend the library. However, another user dealing with such a subclass should only use execute, so he won't see the correct docstring if he uses help(execute).
Therefore it would be nice to modify the base class in such a way that in a subclass the docstring of execute is automatically replaced with that of _execute. Any ideas how this might be done?
I was thinking of metaclasses to do this, to make this completely transparent to the user.

Well, if you don't mind copying the original method in the subclass, you can use the following technique.
import new
def copyfunc(func):
return new.function(func.func_code, func.func_globals, func.func_name,
func.func_defaults, func.func_closure)
class Metaclass(type):
def __new__(meta, name, bases, attrs):
for key in attrs.keys():
if key[0] == '_':
skey = key[1:]
for base in bases:
original = getattr(base, skey, None)
if original is not None:
copy = copyfunc(original)
copy.__doc__ = attrs[key].__doc__
attrs[skey] = copy
break
return type.__new__(meta, name, bases, attrs)
class Class(object):
__metaclass__ = Metaclass
def execute(self):
'''original doc-string'''
return self._execute()
class Subclass(Class):
def _execute(self):
'''sub-class doc-string'''
pass

Is there a reason you can't override the base class's execute function directly?
class Base(object):
def execute(self):
...
class Derived(Base):
def execute(self):
"""Docstring for derived class"""
Base.execute(self)
...stuff specific to Derived...
If you don't want to do the above:
Method objects don't support writing to the __doc__ attribute, so you have to change __doc__ in the actual function object. Since you don't want to override the one in the base class, you'd have to give each subclass its own copy of execute:
class Derived(Base):
def execute(self):
return Base.execute(self)
class _execute(self):
"""Docstring for subclass"""
...
execute.__doc__= _execute.__doc__
but this is similar to a roundabout way of redefining execute...

Look at the functools.wraps() decorator; it does all of this, but I don't know offhand if you can get it to run in the right context

Well the doc-string is stored in __doc__ so it wouldn't be too hard to re-assign it based on the doc-string of _execute after the fact.
Basically:
class MyClass(object):
def execute(self):
'''original doc-string'''
self._execute()
class SubClass(MyClass):
def _execute(self):
'''sub-class doc-string'''
pass
# re-assign doc-string of execute
def execute(self,*args,**kw):
return MyClass.execute(*args,**kw)
execute.__doc__=_execute.__doc__
Execute has to be re-declared to that the doc string gets attached to the version of execute for the SubClass and not for MyClass (which would otherwise interfere with other sub-classes).
That's not a very tidy way of doing it, but from the POV of the user of a library it should give the desired result. You could then wrap this up in a meta-class to make it easier for people who are sub-classing.

I agree that the simplest, most Pythonic way of approaching this is to simply redefine execute in your subclasses and have it call the execute method of the base class:
class Sub(Base):
def execute(self):
"""New docstring goes here"""
return Base.execute(self)
This is very little code to accomplish what you want; the only downside is that you must repeat this code in every subclass that extends Base. However, this is a small price to pay for the behavior you want.
If you want a sloppy and verbose way of making sure that the docstring for execute is dynamically generated, you can use the descriptor protocol, which would be significantly less code than the other proposals here. This is annoying because you can't just set a descriptor on an existing function, which means that execute must be written as a separate class with a __call__ method.
Here's the code to do this, but keep in mind that my above example is much simpler and more Pythonic:
class Executor(object):
__doc__ = property(lambda self: self.inst._execute.__doc__)
def __call__(self):
return self.inst._execute()
class Base(object):
execute = Executor()
class Sub(Base):
def __init__(self):
self.execute.inst = self
def _execute(self):
"""Actually does something!"""
return "Hello World!"
spam = Sub()
print spam.execute.__doc__ # prints "Actually does something!"
help(spam) # the execute method says "Actually does something!"