Why python understanding "self", "this" and "that"? - python

I am new to Python with Java background, the concept of "self" in function confuses me. I understand first argument "self" mean the object itself, but I do not understand how Python make this work. I also know that I could use "this" or "that" or "somethingElse", and Python would still understanding I mean to use the object.
I copied some code from a reddit post:
class A():
def __init__(self):
self.value = ""
def b(this):
this.value = "b"
def c(that):
that.value = "c"
a = A()
print(a.value)
a.b()
print(a.value)
>>>"b"
a.c()
print(a.value)
>>>"c"
How do python knows I do not mean to use an object here in the first argument? For example I modified the above code a bit:
class A():
def __init__(self):
self.value = ""
def b(this):
this.value = "b"
def c(that):
that.value = "c"
def somethingElse(someObjectIWantToPass):
someObjectIWantToPass.value = "still referring A.value"
class B():
def __init__(self):
self.value = ""
a = A()
print(a.value)
a.b()
print(a.value)
a.c()
print(a.value)
a.somethingElse()
print(a.value)
b = B()
a.somethingElse(b)
print (b.value)
And it broke:
b
c
still referring A.value
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "D:/Documents/test.py", line 32, in <module>
a.somethingElse(b)
TypeError: somethingElse() takes 1 positional argument but 2 were given

A method's first argument is always1 its instance. Calling it self is idiomatic in Python but that name is strictly convention.
class A():
def some_method(me): # not called `self`
print(str(id(me))
a = A()
a.some_method()
print(id(a))
If you're trying to pass another arbitrary object in, it has to be the second argument.
class B():
def another_method(self, other):
print(id(other))
b = B()
b.another_method(a)
print(id(b)) # different!
print(id(a)) # the same.
1 Not actually always. #classmethod decorated methods use cls as their first argument, and #staticmethod` decorated methods have nothing passed to its first argument by default.
class C():
#classmethod
def some_classmethod(cls, other, arguments):
# first argument is not the instance, but
# the class C itself.
#staticmethod
def something_related(other, arguments):
# the first argument gets neither the instance
# nor the class.

You are too focused on syntactic sugar. Just realize that the first parameter in a non static member function in python is the reference to the current object. Whether you want to call it this, that, foobar, poop, it doesn't matter. The first parameter of a member function is considered the reference to the object on which the method is called.
The use of self is just a universal way everyone has understood it and the way Python recommends - a convention if you may.
The same goes for **kwargs and *args. These are simply conventions that have permeated the Python ecosystem and everyone just uses it that way, but it doesn't mean you can't give them a different name.
Your last example broke because the function you are calling (A.something) does not take any parameters. This will make sense if you understood what I had said earlier about first parameter in non static member function being a reference to the object on which the method was called.

Related

Super class appears to wrongly reference properties of derived class

In the following python code (I'm using 3.8), an object of class B derived from class A calls methods bar and foo that access members of the parent class through the super() function. Hence, I would expect the same result as calling bar and foo directly on A. Oddly, what is returned is affected by the parameterization of p of B, which should not happen because A should shielded from its children, shouldn't it?! Here is the code to reproduce:
class A(object):
#property
def p(self):
return 3
def bar(self):
return self.p
def foo(self):
return self.bar()
class B(A):
#property
def p(self):
return 6
def bar(self):
return super().p
def foo(self):
return super().bar()
a, b = A(), B()
print(a.p) # prints 3, OK
print(b.p) # prints 6, OK
print(a.bar()) # prints 3, OK
print(b.bar()) # prints 3, OK, since where accessing super().p
print(a.foo()) # prints 3, OK
print(b.foo()) # prints 6, NOT OK, because we are accessing super().bar() and expect 3
I'm out of my wits here, so if someone could iluminate on the rationale of this behavior and show a way to avoid it, this would be most helpful. Thanks a lot.
Welcome to the intricacies of super!
super() here is a shortcut for super(B, self). It returns a proxy that will look in the class MRO for the class coming before B, so A and super().bar() will actually call:
A.bar(self)
without changing the original b object...
And A.bar(self) is actually... b.p and will give 6
If you are used to other object oriented languages like C++, all happens as if all method in Python were virtual (non final in Java wordings)
super().attr means to look up the attr attribue in the parent. If the attr is a method, it looks up the method's code (instructions to execute). But that does not modify the passed arguments in any way, it just sets the instuctions.
In Python the self is an argument behind the scenes. If c=C(), then c.meth(...) means C.meth(c, ...), i.e. a call of method meth defined in the class C with first argument c (other args follow, if any). The first arg becomes the self argument in the method's implementation. The name self is just a convention, not a special keyword)
Back to the question. Here is a simplified program without properties, it behaves the same:
class A:
P = 3
def bar(self):
return self.P
def foo(self):
return self.bar()
class B(A):
P = 6
def bar(self):
return super().P
def foo(self):
return super().bar()
b.foo() invokes super().bar(), i.e. the bar() in the parent class A. That method contains code that simply returns self.P. But self is b, so the lookup returns 6. (In your original program p is a property that returns 6)

How to pass arguments to python function whose first parameter is self?

Take the following simplified example.
class A(object):
variable_A = 1
variable_B = 2
def functionA(self, param):
print(param+self.variable_A)
print(A.functionA(3))
In the above example, I get the following error
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "python", line 8, in <module>
TypeError: functionA() missing 1 required positional argument: 'param'
But, if I remove the self, in the function declaration, I am not able to access the variables variable_A and variable_B in the class, and I get the following error
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "python", line 8, in <module>
File "python", line 6, in functionA
NameError: name 'self' is not defined
So, how do I access the class variables and not get the param error here?
I am using Python 3 FYI.
You must first create an instance of the class A
class A(object):
variable_A = 1
variable_B = 2
def functionA(self, param):
return (param+self.variable_A)
a = A()
print(a.functionA(3))
You can use staticmethod decorator if you don't want to use an instance.
Static methods are a special case of methods. Sometimes, you'll write code that belongs to a class, but that doesn't use the object itself at all.
class A(object):
variable_A = 1
variable_B = 2
#staticmethod
def functionA(param):
return (param+A.variable_A)
print(A.functionA(3))
Another option is to use classmethod decorator.
Class methods are methods that are not bound to an object, but to a class!
class A(object):
variable_A = 1
variable_B = 2
#classmethod
def functionA(cls,param):
return (param+cls.variable_A)
print(A.functionA(3))
functionA in your snippet above is an instance method. You do not pass "self" directly to it. Instead, you need to create an instance in order to use it. The "self" argument of the function is, in fact, the instance it's called on. E.g.:
a = A()
a.functionA(3)
P.S.
Note that your functionA calls print but doesn't return anything, meaning it implicitly returns None. You should either have it return a value and print it from the caller, or, as I have done above, call it and let it print on its own.
Create an object of A first.
a = A()
a.functionA(3)
When a function object (what the def statement creates) is an attribute of a class AND is looked up (using the obj.attrname scheme) on the class or an instance of the class, it gets turned into a method object. This method object is itself a callable. If the lookup happens on an instance, this instance will be "magically" inserted as the first argument to the function. If not, you will have to provide it by yourself (just like you would for any other argument).
You can read more about this (and how the "magic" happens here: https://wiki.python.org/moin/FromFunctionToMethod
In your case, you lookup the function on the class, so it expects two arguments (self and param), but you only pass param, hence the error.
You defined variable_A and variable_B as class attributes (attributes that will be shared between all instances of the class). If that's really the intention, and you want a method you can call on the class itself and that will be able to access class attributes, you can make functionA a classmethod (it works the same as an "instance" method except it's the class that is 'magically' inserted as first argument):
class A(object):
variable_A = 1
variable_B = 2
#classmethod
def functionA(cls, param):
return param + cls.variable_A
Then you can call functionA either directly on the class itself:
print(A.functionA(42))
or on an instance if you already have one at hand:
a = A()
# ...
print(a.functionA(42))
Now if you really wanted variable_A and variable_B to be per-instance attributes (each instance of A has it's own distinct variables), you need to 1/ create those attributes on the instance itself in the initialier method and 2/ call functionA on some A instance, ie:
class A(object):
def __init__(self, variable_A=1, variable_B=2):
self.variable_A = variableA
self.variable_B = variableB
def functionA(self, param):
return param + self.variable_A
a1 = A() # using default values
print(a1.functionA(42))
a2 = A(5) # custom value for variable_A
print(a2.functionA(42))
class A(object):
variable_A = 1
variable_B = 2
def functionA(self, param):
print(param+self.variable_A)
A().functionA(3)
A() is calling the class to create an instance
4
[Program finished]
You can use return in function and then print at last.
Posting this answer as per OP template , accepted answers and other answers are recommended way to do it.

Change method definition

I want to change method definition of a class.
That is my case:
(I am importing these classes from another file)
class A(object):
def __init__(self, str):
self.str = str
def method_a(self):
print self.str
class B(object):
def __init__(self, str):
self.a = A(str)
def method_b(self):
self.a.method_a()
#######################################
from module import A, B
def main():
b = B('hello')
def my_method_a(self):
print self.str + 'other definition'
b.a.method_a = my_method_a
b.method_b()
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
When I try to execute it, I get:
my_method_a() takes exactly 1 argument (0 given)
Because it does not get 'self'.
Any help please.
If you were to run type(b.a.method_a) before patching the method, you would see <type 'instancemethod'>. Running the same code after the patch produces <type 'function'>. In order for a function to work properly as a method, it must be an attribute of the class, not an instance of the class. The following would work, as you are manually invoking the magic that produces a method from a function:
b.a.method_a = my_method_a.__get__(b.a, A)
See https://wiki.python.org/moin/FromFunctionToMethod for more information.
The difference is that when you call b.a.method_a() after the patch, method_a is an attribute of the instance b.a, not of the class A. As a result, the function's __get__ method is never called to produce an instancemethod object which already has b.a bound to the first argument of method_a.
From one perspective, b.a.method_a() is identical to A.method_a(b.a). How does Python make that transition? You need to understand the descriptor protocol. All function objects implement the __get__ method to return an instancemethod object, which you can think of as the original function with the first argument bound to the appropriate object. Consider this code:
b = B()
b.a.method_a()
Does b have an attribute called a? Yes; we set it in B.__init__.
Does b.a have an attribute method_a? No.
Does type(b.a) (that is, A) have an attribute method_a? Yes.
Call A.method_a.__get__(b.a, A), since method_a was looked up for an instance. The result is an instance method object, with its first argument bound to b.a. (This is why you can consider b.a.method_a() identical to A.method_a(b.a)).
Call the resulting instance method with zero arguments.
Now consider this code.
b = B()
b.a.method_a = my_method_a
b.a.method_a()
Does b have an attribute called a? Yes; we set it in B.__init__.
Does b.a have an attribute method_a? Yes. We set it just before we tried to call it.
Since b.a.method_a was an instance lookup, not a class lookup, the descriptor protocol is not invoked and b.a.method_a.__get__ is not called, even though my_method_a has a __get__ function just like every other function.
Call b.a.method_a with zero arguments.
This produces the error, since the function expects one argument.
why not just use inheritance and method overrides:
from module import A, B
class myA(A):
def method_a(self):
print self.str + ' other definition'
class myB(B):
def __init__(self, str):
self.a = myA(str)
def main():
b = myB('hello')
b.method_b()
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()

which position is self in python class?

In the book learning python 5th edition (o'reilly Mark Lutz)page912)
class PrivateExc(Exception): pass # More on exceptions in Part VII
class Privacy:
def __setattr__(self, attrname, value): # On self.attrname = value
if attrname in self.privates:
raise PrivateExc(attrname, self) # Make, raise user-define except
else:
self.__dict__[attrname] = value # Avoid loops by using dict key
class Test1(Privacy):
privates = ['age']
class Test2(Privacy):
privates = ['name', 'pay']
def __init__(self):
self.__dict__['name'] = 'Tom' # To do better, see Chapter 39!
Maybe it is wrong in the 5th lineraise PrivateExc(attrname, self) ,
the self argument will be set as position 1st.
Will be the line changed into raise PrivateExc(self,attrname)?Why not?
Actually it doesn't matter.
Subclassing from Exception without any additional constructor doesn't restrict what you can pass as arguments to the exception class. And you can pass them in any order you want.
The arguments passed to the PrivateExc class just get stored in the instance as the instance attribute .args
Example:
>>> class MyError(Exception):
... """MyError"""
...
>>> e = MyError("foo", "bar")
>>> e.args
('foo', 'bar')
>>> e
MyError('foo', 'bar')
What this basically means in the book you're reading is;
If you were to catch the exception PrivateExc you'd do something like this:
try:
...
except PrivateExc as error:
attrname, obj = error.args
...
When you are calling a method like this:
#!/bin/python
myinstance.some_method(a,b,c)
... then this is dispatched to some_method as: some_method(myinstance, a, b, c)
The instance through which the method was invoked is passed as your first argument. This is completely different than C++ and Java ... which use an implicit "this" reference ... a pointer valid from within your method's scope but not passed to it as an argument.
I hope that answers your question, thought the code example does nothing to clarify what you're attempting to do.
I think you are just confused about parameters in function definition and function calling.
In a class, a method(instance method) has a non-optional parameter in the first position, usually named self, in the definition, like this:
class Foo:
def foo(self, another_param):
pass
And the self references the instance that you call foo function with. If you have code like this:
f=Foo()
f.foo("test")
self references the f and another_param references the "test" string in the above code.
And then in the foo function, you can use self just like other parameters.
Suppose you have a Print function like this:
def Print(x):
print "Param:", x
Then you can make you Foo class like this:
class Foo:
def foo(self, another_param):
Print(another_param) # I think this will not confuse you
Or this:
class Foo:
def foo(self, another_param):
Print(self) # Now, you may understand this, self is just a param in function calling, like another_param
And now, change the Print function to PrivateExc(you can think it a function to create a PrivateExc instance here), you may understand it either.
Hope these examples can help you understand you question.

In a Python class, what is the difference between creating a variable with the self syntax, and creating one without ?

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'

Categories