We Keep Coding

How to overwrite self after reading yaml? [duplicate]

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>

Access attribute of outer class from nested class [duplicate]

I have a situation like so...
class Outer(object):
def some_method(self):
# do something
class Inner(object):
def __init__(self):
self.Outer.some_method() # <-- this is the line in question
How can I access the Outer class's method from the Inner class?

You're trying to access Outer's class instance, from inner class instance. So just use factory-method to build Inner instance and pass Outer instance to it.
class Outer(object):
def createInner(self):
return Outer.Inner(self)
class Inner(object):
def __init__(self, outer_instance):
self.outer_instance = outer_instance
self.outer_instance.somemethod()
def inner_method(self):
self.outer_instance.anothermethod()

The methods of a nested class cannot directly access the instance attributes of the outer class.
Note that it is not necessarily the case that an instance of the outer class exists even when you have created an instance of the inner class.
In fact, it is often recommended against using nested classes, since the nesting does not imply any particular relationship between the inner and outer classes.

maybe I'm mad but this seems very easy indeed - the thing is to make your inner class inside a method of the outer class...
def do_sthg(self):
...
def mess_around(self):
outer_class_self = self
class Mooble():
def do_sthg_different(self):
...
outer_class_self.do_sthg()
Plus... "self" is only used by convention, so you could do this:
def do_sthg(self):
...
def mess_around(outer_class_self):
class Mooble():
def do_sthg_different(self):
...
outer_class_self.do_sthg()
It might be objected that you can't then create this inner class from outside the outer class... but this ain't true:
class Bumblebee():
def do_sthg(self):
print "sthg"
def give_me_an_inner_class(outer_class_self):
class Mooble():
def do_sthg_different(self):
print "something diff\n"
outer_class_self.do_sthg()
return Mooble
then, somewhere miles away:
blob = Bumblebee().give_me_an_inner_class()()
blob.do_sthg_different()
even push the boat out a bit and extend this inner class (NB to get super() to work you have to change the class signature of Mooble to class Mooble(object)).
class InnerBumblebeeWithAddedBounce(Bumblebee().give_me_an_inner_class()):
def bounce(self):
print "bounce"
def do_sthg_different(self):
super(InnerBumblebeeWithAddedBounce, self).do_sthg_different()
print "and more different"
ibwab = InnerBumblebeeWithAddedBounce()
ibwab.bounce()
ibwab.do_sthg_different()
later
mrh1997 raised an interesting point about the non-common inheritance of inner classes delivered using this technique. But it seems that the solution is pretty straightforward:
class Fatty():
def do_sthg(self):
pass
class InnerFatty(object):
pass
def give_me_an_inner_fatty_class(self):
class ExtendedInnerFatty(Fatty.InnerFatty):
pass
return ExtendedInnerFatty
fatty1 = Fatty()
fatty2 = Fatty()
innerFattyClass1 = fatty1.give_me_an_inner_fatty_class()
innerFattyClass2 = fatty2.give_me_an_inner_fatty_class()
print (issubclass(innerFattyClass1, Fatty.InnerFatty))
print (issubclass(innerFattyClass2, Fatty.InnerFatty))

I found this.
Tweaked to suite your question:
class Outer(object):
def some_method(self):
# do something
class _Inner(object):
def __init__(self, outer):
outer.some_method()
def Inner(self):
return _Inner(self)
I’m sure you can somehow write a decorator for this or something
related: What is the purpose of python's inner classes?

A few years late to the party.... but to expand on #mike rodent's wonderful answer, I've provided my own example below that shows just how flexible his solution is, and why it should be (or should have been) the accepted answer.
Python 3.7
class Parent():
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
self.children = []
class Inner(object):
pass
def Child(self, name):
parent = self
class Child(Parent.Inner):
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
self.parent = parent
parent.children.append(self)
return Child(name)
parent = Parent('Bar')
child1 = parent.Child('Foo')
child2 = parent.Child('World')
print(
# Getting its first childs name
child1.name, # From itself
parent.children[0].name, # From its parent
# Also works with the second child
child2.name,
parent.children[1].name,
# Go nuts if you want
child2.parent.children[0].name,
child1.parent.children[1].name
)
print(
# Getting the parents name
parent.name, # From itself
child1.parent.name, # From its children
child2.parent.name,
# Go nuts again if you want
parent.children[0].parent.name,
parent.children[1].parent.name,
# Or insane
child2.parent.children[0].parent.children[1].parent.name,
child1.parent.children[1].parent.children[0].parent.name
)
# Second parent? No problem
parent2 = Parent('John')
child3 = parent2.Child('Doe')
child4 = parent2.Child('Appleseed')
print(
child3.name, parent2.children[0].name,
child4.name, parent2.children[1].name,
parent2.name # ....
)
Output:
Foo Foo World World Foo World
Bar Bar Bar Bar Bar Bar Bar
Doe Doe Appleseed Appleseed John
Again, a wonderful answer, props to you mike!

You can easily access to outer class using metaclass: after creation of outer class check it's attribute dict for any classes (or apply any logic you need - mine is just trivial example) and set corresponding values:
import six
import inspect
# helper method from `peewee` project to add metaclass
_METACLASS_ = '_metaclass_helper_'
def with_metaclass(meta, base=object):
return meta(_METACLASS_, (base,), {})
class OuterMeta(type):
def __new__(mcs, name, parents, dct):
cls = super(OuterMeta, mcs).__new__(mcs, name, parents, dct)
for klass in dct.values():
if inspect.isclass(klass):
print("Setting outer of '%s' to '%s'" % (klass, cls))
klass.outer = cls
return cls
# #six.add_metaclass(OuterMeta) -- this is alternative to `with_metaclass`
class Outer(with_metaclass(OuterMeta)):
def foo(self):
return "I'm outer class!"
class Inner(object):
outer = None # <-- by default it's None
def bar(self):
return "I'm inner class"
print(Outer.Inner.outer)
>>> <class '__main__.Outer'>
assert isinstance(Outer.Inner.outer(), Outer)
print(Outer().foo())
>>> I'm outer class!
print(Outer.Inner.outer().foo())
>>> I'm outer class!
print(Outer.Inner().outer().foo())
>>> I'm outer class!
print(Outer.Inner().bar())
>>> I'm inner class!
Using this approach, you can easily bind and refer two classes between each other.

I've created some Python code to use an outer class from its inner class, based on a good idea from another answer for this question. I think it's short, simple and easy to understand.
class higher_level__unknown_irrelevant_name__class:
def __init__(self, ...args...):
...other code...
# Important lines to access sub-classes.
subclasses = self._subclass_container()
self.some_subclass = subclasses["some_subclass"]
del subclasses # Free up variable for other use.
def sub_function(self, ...args...):
...other code...
def _subclass_container(self):
_parent_class = self # Create access to parent class.
class some_subclass:
def __init__(self):
self._parent_class = _parent_class # Easy access from self.
# Optional line, clears variable space, but SHOULD NOT BE USED
# IF THERE ARE MULTIPLE SUBCLASSES as would stop their parent access.
# del _parent_class
class subclass_2:
def __init__(self):
self._parent_class = _parent_class
# Return reference(s) to the subclass(es).
return {"some_subclass": some_subclass, "subclass_2": subclass_2}
The main code, "production ready" (without comments, etc.). Remember to replace all of each value in angle brackets (e.g. <x>) with the desired value.
class <higher_level_class>:
def __init__(self):
subclasses = self._subclass_container()
self.<sub_class> = subclasses[<sub_class, type string>]
del subclasses
def _subclass_container(self):
_parent_class = self
class <sub_class>:
def __init__(self):
self._parent_class = _parent_class
return {<sub_class, type string>: <sub_class>}
Explanation of how this method works (the basic steps):
Create a function named _subclass_container to act as a wrapper to access the variable self, a reference to the higher level class (from code running inside the function).
Create a variable named _parent_class which is a reference to the variable self of this function, that the sub-classes of _subclass_container can access (avoids name conflicts with other self variables in subclasses).
Return the sub-class/sub-classes as a dictionary/list so code calling the _subclass_container function can access the sub-classes inside.
In the __init__ function inside the higher level class (or wherever else needed), receive the returned sub-classes from the function _subclass_container into the variable subclasses.
Assign sub-classes stored in the subclasses variable to attributes of the higher level class.
A few tips to make scenarios easier:
Making the code to assign the sub classes to the higher level class easier to copy and be used in classes derived from the higher level class that have their __init__ function changed:
Insert before line 12 in the main code:
def _subclass_init(self):
Then insert into this function lines 5-6 (of the main code) and replace lines 4-7 with the following code:
self._subclass_init(self)
Making subclass assigning to the higher level class possible when there are many/unknown quantities of subclasses.
Replace line 6 with the following code:
for subclass_name in list(subclasses.keys()):
setattr(self, subclass_name, subclasses[subclass_name])
Example scenario of where this solution would be useful and where the higher level class name should be impossible to get:
A class, named "a" (class a:) is created. It has subclasses that need to access it (the parent). One subclass is called "x1". In this subclass, the code a.run_func() is run.
Then another class, named "b" is created, derived from class "a" (class b(a):). After that, some code runs b.x1() (calling the sub function "x1" of b, a derived sub-class). This function runs a.run_func(), calling the function "run_func" of class "a", not the function "run_func" of its parent, "b" (as it should), because the function which was defined in class "a" is set to refer to the function of class "a", as that was its parent.
This would cause problems (e.g. if function a.run_func has been deleted) and the only solution without rewriting the code in class a.x1 would be to redefine the sub-class x1 with updated code for all classes derived from class "a" which would obviously be difficult and not worth it.

Do you mean to use inheritance, rather than nesting classes like this? What you're doing doesn't make a heap of sense in Python.
You can access the Outer's some_method by just referencing Outer.some_method within the inner class's methods, but it's not going to work as you expect it will. For example, if you try this:
class Outer(object):
def some_method(self):
# do something
class Inner(object):
def __init__(self):
Outer.some_method()
...you'll get a TypeError when initialising an Inner object, because Outer.some_method expects to receive an Outer instance as its first argument. (In the example above, you're basically trying to call some_method as a class method of Outer.)

Another possibility:
class _Outer (object):
# Define your static methods here, e.g.
#staticmethod
def subclassRef ():
return Outer
class Outer (_Outer):
class Inner (object):
def outer (self):
return _Outer
def doSomething (self):
outer = self.outer ()
# Call your static mehthods.
cls = outer.subclassRef ()
return cls ()

What we can do is pass the self variable of Outer Class inside the Inner Class as Class Argument and Under Outer init initialise the Inner Class with Outer self passed into Inner
class Outer:
def __init__(self):
self.somevalue=91
self.Inner=self.Inner(self)
def SomeMethod(self):
print('This is Something from Outer Class')
class Inner:
def __init__(self,Outer)
self.SomeMethod=Outer.SomeMethod
self.somevalue=Outer.somevalue
def SomeAnotherMethod(self):
print(self.somevalue)
self.SomeMethod()
>>>f=Outer()
>>>f.Inner.SomeAnotherMethod()
91
This is Something from Outer Class
Now After running this function it Works

Expanding on #tsnorri's cogent thinking, that the outer method may be a static method:
class Outer(object):
#staticmethod
def some_static_method(self):
# do something
class Inner(object):
def __init__(self):
self.some_static_method() # <-- this will work later
Inner.some_static_method = some_static_method
Now the line in question should work by the time it is actually called.
The last line in the above code gives the Inner class a static method that's a clone of the Outer static method.
This takes advantage of two Python features, that functions are objects, and scope is textual.
Usually, the local scope references the local names of the (textually) current function.
...or current class in our case. So objects "local" to the definition of the Outer class (Inner and some_static_method) may be referred to directly within that definition.

You may create a class, to decorate inner classes. In this case #inner.
Since this a decorator: Outer.A = inner(Outer.A). Once your code requires Outer.A it will be executed inner.__get__ method, which returns the original class (A) with a new attribute set on it: A.owner = Outer.
A classmethod in class A, in this case def add(cls, y=3), may use new attribute owner at return cls.owner.x + y + 1.
The line setattr(owner, name, self.inner), breaks the descriptor because owner.name => Outer.A => A is no longer an instance of the class inner.
Hope this helps.
class inner:
def __init__(self, inner):
self.inner = inner
def __get__(self, instance, owner):
print('__get__ method executed, only once... ')
name = self.inner.__name__
setattr(self.inner, 'owner', owner)
setattr(owner, name, self.inner) # breaks descriptor
return self.inner #returns Inner
class Outer:
x = 1
#inner
class A:
#classmethod
def add(cls, y=3):
return cls.owner.x + y + 1
print(Outer.A.add(0)) # First time executes inner.__get__ method
print(Outer.A.add(0)) # Second time not necessary.
>> __get__ method executed, only once...
>> 2
>> 2

It can be done by parsing the outer class object into inner class.
class Outer():
def __init__(self,userinput):
self.userinput = userinput
def outer_function(self):
self.a = self.userinput + 2
class Inner():
def inner_function(self):
self.b = self.a + 10
after defining this, it need to run the function
m = Outer(3)
m.outer_function()
print (m.a)
#this will output 5
Now it has the variable of outer class.
and then, it need to run inner class functions.
m.Inner.inner_function(m)
The object m of outer class is parsed into the function of inner class (inside the brackets)
Now, the inner class function is accessing self.a from the outer class.
print (m.b)
#this will output 15

It is too simple:
Input:
class A:
def __init__(self):
pass
def func1(self):
print('class A func1')
class B:
def __init__(self):
a1 = A()
a1.func1()
def func1(self):
print('class B func1')
b = A.B()
b.func1()
Output
class A func1
class B func1

When does the name mangling occur when using double underscores?

class Test():
def __init__(self):
self.__test = "cats"
print(self.__test)
def __example(self):
print("Hello World")
x = Test()
print(x.__dict__)
With the code I wrote above, the print statement will show to access the variable test, I will need to write _Test__test, however as shown I can print the variable if I call it directly afterwards within the __init__ method. So my question is, if I can access it directly after it has been declared by its name i.e self.__test, at which point does it become mangled?

Attributes accessed via .__ are mangled anywhere in the class body (But an inner class declaration would get to it first.).
Think of it as syntactic sugar.
In the context of the Test class body, self.__test is an alias to the mangled name self._Test__test; in context, they mean exactly the same thing.
A demonstration would make this clearer. First, some helper classes.
class PrintAttrAccess:
def __getattr__(self, name):
print(name)
class Empty: pass
Now for the demonstration:
class Test:
print('IN TEST BODY')
(lambda: PrintAttrAccess().__in_lambda)() # Anywhere in the class body works.
classfoo = Empty()
classfoo.__foo = 'foo'
print("Same thing?", classfoo.__foo is classfoo._Test__foo)
print("vars() of classfoo:", vars(classfoo))
class Inner:
print('IN INNER')
PrintAccess().__inner
def __init__(self):
print('IN INIT')
print("Who am I?", self)
self.__test = "cats"
print(self._Test__test) # It's ALREADY MANGLED!
# This line means exactly the same as the one above.
print(self.__test)
localfoo = Empty()
localfoo.__spam = 'spam' # "self" isn't special.
print("vars() of localfoo:", vars(localfoo))
def outside_method(self):
print('OUTSIDE BODY')
print("Who am I?", self)
self.__test = "dogs"
print(self._Test__test)
print(self.__test) # Sugar doesn't apply outside of class body.
Test.outside_method = outside_method # Add a new method to Test class.
Test().outside_method() # init and call as method.
The output is:
IN TEST BODY
_Test__in_lambda
Same thing? True
vars() of classfoo: {'_Test__foo': 'foo'}
IN INNER
_Inner__inner
IN INIT
Who am I? <__main__.Test object at 0x000001CCF3048978>
cats
cats
vars() of localfoo: {'_Test__spam': 'spam'}
OUTSIDE BODY
Who am I? <__main__.Test object at 0x000001CCF3048978>
cats
dogs

If I can access it directly after it has been declared by its name i.e self.__test, at which point does it become mangled?
It becomes mangled when you reference it from outside the class.
Your line 5, print(self.__test) isn't mangled because you're referencing it from inside the class. It's only mangled once you refer to it from outside the class. Thus, you would call
print(x._Test__test)
Note that, you could also use self._Test__test within your class.
class Test():
def __init__(self):
self.__test = "cats"
def get(self):
return self._Test__test
x = Test()
print(x.get()) ## cats
I think this article explains it pretty well: The Meaning of Underscores in Python.

Get variable value defined in another python code

In order to create a code, I have decided to create a python class to just define some variables with default value. you can see this as "struct" in C.
the file is name : ScreenStructure.py
Inside I have defined this code
class ViewIdleScreen():
def _init_(self):
self.menu_access = "id/no_id/21"
self.Call_app = "id/no_id/23"
self.Email_app = "idno_id/24"
self.Camera_app = "id/no_id/27"
self.Browser_app = "id/no_id/26"
self.Contacts_app = "id/no_id/9"
self.Calendar_app = "id/no_id/10"
self.Messaging_app = "id/no_id/11"
self.Notes_app = "id/no_id/12"
def Call_app(self):
return self.Call_app
In the main file, I have added :
from ScreenStructure import ViewIdleScreen
later in the code of the main file:
IdleScreenView = ViewIdleScreen()
print IdleScreenView.Call_app()
but instead of displaying "id/no_id/23" it display
<bound method ViewIdleScreen.Call_app of <ScreenStructure.ViewIdleScreen instance at 0x02A16990>>

First, you're naming __init__ _init_. This is wrong. You need two underscores.
Second, you're setting an attribute Call_app there, but that's the same name as the method you define later:
def Call_app(self):
return self.Call_app
In addition to being shadowed by the attribute (if __init__ were declared properly), this method returns the method itself, which is the bound method you're seeing.
Avoid the collision of attribute and method names, and name __init__ correctly

you should not make functions named the same as data members
hello = "hello world"
def hello():
print "goodbye!"
print hello
often times people will make a variable name preceded by an underscore or something
class X:
def __init__(self,*args):
self._x = "yellow"
def x(self):
return self._x
but as #mhlester points out a main problem is that you named __init__ incorrectly

Getting an instance name inside class __init__() [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Getting the name of a variable as a string
(32 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
While building a new class object in python, I want to be able to create a default value based on the instance name of the class without passing in an extra argument. How can I accomplish this? Here's the basic pseudo-code I'm trying for:
class SomeObject():
defined_name = u""
def __init__(self, def_name=None):
if def_name == None:
def_name = u"%s" % (<INSTANCE NAME>)
self.defined_name = def_name
ThisObject = SomeObject()
print ThisObject.defined_name # Should print "ThisObject"

Well, there is almost a way to do it:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import traceback
class SomeObject():
def __init__(self, def_name=None):
if def_name == None:
(filename,line_number,function_name,text)=traceback.extract_stack()[-2]
def_name = text[:text.find('=')].strip()
self.defined_name = def_name
ThisObject = SomeObject()
print ThisObject.defined_name
# ThisObject
The traceback module allows you to peek at the code used to call SomeObject().
With a little string wrangling, text[:text.find('=')].strip() you can
guess what the def_name should be.
However, this hack is brittle. For example, this doesn't work so well:
ThisObject,ThatObject = SomeObject(),SomeObject()
print ThisObject.defined_name
# ThisObject,ThatObject
print ThatObject.defined_name
# ThisObject,ThatObject
So if you were to use this hack, you have to bear in mind that you must call SomeObject()
using simple python statement:
ThisObject = SomeObject()
By the way, as a further example of using traceback, if you define
def pv(var):
# stack is a list of 4-tuples: (filename, line number, function name, text)
# see http://docs.python.org/library/traceback.html#module-traceback
#
(filename,line_number,function_name,text)=traceback.extract_stack()[-2]
# ('x_traceback.py', 18, 'f', 'print_var(y)')
print('%s: %s'%(text[text.find('(')+1:-1],var))
then you can call
x=3.14
pv(x)
# x: 3.14
to print both the variable name and its value.

Instances don't have names. By the time the global name ThisObject gets bound to the instance created by evaluating the SomeObject constructor, the constructor has finished running.
If you want an object to have a name, just pass the name along in the constructor.
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name

You can create a method inside your class that check all variables in the current frame and use hash() to look for the self variable.
The solution proposed here will return all the variables pointing to the instance object.
In the class below, isinstance() is used to avoid problems when applying hash(), since some objects like a numpy.array or a list, for example, are unhashable.
import inspect
class A(object):
def get_my_name(self):
ans = []
frame = inspect.currentframe().f_back
tmp = dict(frame.f_globals.items() + frame.f_locals.items())
for k, var in tmp.items():
if isinstance(var, self.__class__):
if hash(self) == hash(var):
ans.append(k)
return ans
The following test has been done:
def test():
a = A()
b = a
c = b
print c.get_my_name()
The result is:
test()
#['a', 'c', 'b']

This cannot work, just imagine this: a = b = TheMagicObjet(). Names have no effect on Values, they just point to them.

One horrible, horrible way to accomplish this is to reverse the responsibilities:
class SomeObject():
def __init__(self, def_name):
self.defined_name = def_name
globals()[def_name] = self
SomeObject("ThisObject")
print ThisObject.defined_name
If you wanted to support something other than global scope, you'd have to do something even more awful.

In Python, all data is stored in objects. Additionally, a name can be bound with an object, after which that name can be used to look up that object.
It makes no difference to the object what names, if any, it might be bound to. It might be bound to dozens of different names, or none. Also, Python does not have any "back links" that point from an object to a name.
Consider this example:
foo = 1
bar = foo
baz = foo
Now, suppose you have the integer object with value 1, and you want to work backwards and find its name. What would you print? Three different names have that object bound to them, and all are equally valid.
print(bar is foo) # prints True
print(baz is foo) # prints True
In Python, a name is a way to access an object, so there is no way to work with names directly. You could search through various name spaces until you find a name that is bound with the object of interest, but I don't recommend this.
How do I get the string representation of a variable in python?
There is a famous presentation called "Code Like a Pythonista" that summarizes this situation as "Other languages have 'variables'" and "Python has 'names'"
http://python.net/~goodger/projects/pycon/2007/idiomatic/handout.html#other-languages-have-variables

If you want an unique instance name for a class, try __repr__() or id(self)
class Some:
def __init__(self):
print(self.__repr__()) # = hex(id(self))
print(id(self))
It will print the memory address of the instance, which is unique.

Inspired by the answers of unutbu and Saullo Castro, I have created a more sophisticated class that can even be subclassed. It solves what was asked for in the question.
"create a default value based on the instance name of the class
without passing in an extra argument."
Here's what it does, when an instance of this class or a subclass is created:
Go up in the frame stack until the first frame which does not belong to a method of the current instance.
Inspect this frame to get the attributes self.creation_(name/file/module/function/line/text).
Perform an an additional check whether an object with name self.creation_name was actually defined in the frame's locals() namespace to make 100% sure the found creation_name is correct or raise an error otherwise.
The Code:
import traceback, threading, time
class InstanceCreationError(Exception):
pass
class RememberInstanceCreationInfo:
def __init__(self):
for frame, line in traceback.walk_stack(None):
varnames = frame.f_code.co_varnames
if varnames is ():
break
if frame.f_locals[varnames[0]] not in (self, self.__class__):
break
# if the frame is inside a method of this instance,
# the first argument usually contains either the instance or
# its class
# we want to find the first frame, where this is not the case
else:
raise InstanceCreationError("No suitable outer frame found.")
self._outer_frame = frame
self.creation_module = frame.f_globals["__name__"]
self.creation_file, self.creation_line, self.creation_function, \
self.creation_text = \
traceback.extract_stack(frame, 1)[0]
self.creation_name = self.creation_text.split("=")[0].strip()
super().__init__()
threading.Thread(target=self._check_existence_after_creation).start()
def _check_existence_after_creation(self):
while self._outer_frame.f_lineno == self.creation_line:
time.sleep(0.01)
# this is executed as soon as the line number changes
# now we can be sure the instance was actually created
error = InstanceCreationError(
"\nCreation name not found in creation frame.\ncreation_file: "
"%s \ncreation_line: %s \ncreation_text: %s\ncreation_name ("
"might be wrong): %s" % (
self.creation_file, self.creation_line, self.creation_text,
self.creation_name))
nameparts = self.creation_name.split(".")
try:
var = self._outer_frame.f_locals[nameparts[0]]
except KeyError:
raise error
finally:
del self._outer_frame
# make sure we have no permament inter frame reference
# which could hinder garbage collection
try:
for name in nameparts[1:]: var = getattr(var, name)
except AttributeError:
raise error
if var is not self: raise error
def __repr__(self):
return super().__repr__()[
:-1] + " with creation_name '%s'>" % self.creation_name
A simple example:
class MySubclass(RememberInstanceCreationInfo):
def __init__(self):
super().__init__()
def print_creation_info(self):
print(self.creation_name, self.creation_module, self.creation_function,
self.creation_line, self.creation_text, sep=", ")
instance = MySubclass()
instance.print_creation_info()
#out: instance, __main__, <module>, 68, instance = MySubclass()
If the creation name cannot be determined properly an error is raised:
variable, another_instance = 2, MySubclass()
# InstanceCreationError:
# Creation name not found in creation frame.
# creation_file: /.../myfile.py
# creation_line: 71
# creation_text: variable, another_instance = 2, MySubclass()
# creation_name (might be wrong): variable, another_instance

I think that names matters if they are the pointers to any object..
no matters if:
foo = 1
bar = foo
I know that foo points to 1 and bar points to the same value 1 into the same memory space.
but supose that I want to create a class with a function that adds a object to it.
Class Bag(object):
def __init__(self):
some code here...
def addItem(self,item):
self.__dict__[somewaytogetItemName] = item
So, when I instantiate the class bag like below:
newObj1 = Bag()
newObj2 = Bag()
newObj1.addItem(newObj2)I can do this to get an attribute of newObj1:
newObj1.newObj2

The best way is really to pass the name to the constructor as in the chosen answer. However, if you REALLY want to avoid asking the user to pass the name to the constructor, you can do the following hack:
If you are creating the instance with 'ThisObject = SomeObject()' from the command line, you can get the object name from the command string in command history:
import readline
import re
class SomeObject():
def __init__(self):
cmd = readline.get_history_item(readline.get_current_history_length())
self.name = re.split('=| ',cmd)[0]
If you are creating the instance using 'exec' command, you can handle this with:
if cmd[0:4] == 'exec': self.name = re.split('\'|=| ',cmd)[1] # if command performed using 'exec'
else: self.name = re.split('=| ',cmd)[0]