We Keep Coding

How can I specialise instances of objects when I don't have access to the instantiation code?

Let's assume I am using a library which gives me instances of classes defined in that library when calling its functions:
>>> from library import find_objects
>>> result = find_objects("name = any")
[SomeObject(name="foo"), SomeObject(name="bar")]
Let's further assume that I want to attach new attributes to these instances. For example a classifier to avoid running this code every time I want to classify the instance:
>>> from library import find_objects
>>> result = find_objects("name = any")
>>> for row in result:
... row.item_class= my_classifier(row)
Note that this is contrived but illustrates the problem: I now have instances of the class SomeObject but the attribute item_class is not defined in that class and trips up the type-checker.
So when I now write:
print(result[0].item_class)
I get a typing error. It also trips up auto-completion in editors as the editor does not know that this attribute exists.
And, not to mention that this way of implementing this is quite ugly and hacky.
One thing I could do is create a subclass of SomeObject:
class ExtendedObject(SomeObject):
item_class = None
def classify(self):
cls = do_something_with(self)
self.item_class = cls
This now makes everything explicit, I get a chance to properly document the new attributes and give it proper type-hints. Everything is clean. However, as mentioned before, the actual instances are created inside library and I don't have control over the instantiation.
Side note: I ran into this issue in flask for the Response class. I noticed that flask actually offers a way to customise the instantiation using Flask.response_class. But I am still interested how this could be achieved in libraries that don't offer this injection seam.
One thing I could do is write a wrapper that does something like this:
class WrappedObject(SomeObject):
item_class = None
wrapped = None
#staticmethod
def from_original(wrapped):
self.wrapped = wrapped
self.item_class = do_something_with(wrapped)
def __getattribute__(self, key):
return getattr(self.wrapped, key)
But this seems rather hacky and will not work in other programming languages.
Or try to copy the data:
from copy import deepcopy
class CopiedObject(SomeObject):
item_class = None
#staticmethod
def from_original(wrapped):
for key, value in vars(wrapped):
setattr(self, key, deepcopy(value))
self.item_class = do_something_with(wrapped)
but this feels equally hacky, and is risky when the objects sue properties and/or descriptors.
Are there any known "clean" patterns for something like this?

I would go with a variant of your WrappedObject approach, with the following adjustments:
I would not extend SomeObject: this is a case where composition feels more appropriate than inheritance
With that in mind, from_original is unnecessary: you can have a proper __init__ method
item_class should be an instance variable and not a class variable. It should be initialized in your WrappedObject class constructor
Think twice before implementing __getattribute__ and forwarding everything to the wrapped object. If you need only a few method and attributes of the original SomeObject class, it might be better to implement them explicitly as methods and properties
class WrappedObject:
def __init__(self, wrapped):
self.wrapped = wrapped
self.item_class = do_something_with(wrapped)
def a_method(self):
return self.wrapped.a_method()
#property
def a_property(self):
return self.wrapped.a_property

Proper way to define function in a class that does not use self value

I am new to opp programming.I wanted to know what to do with a function that is inside the class but does not use self value
For example
class example:
def __init__(self,n):
self.number=n
def get_t(self,t):
return t*t
def main(self):
b=1
k=self.get_t(b)
From the example the function get_t has nothing to do with self value.
So I wanted to know where to place the function get_t or may be how to restructure the class.
Thank you for your consideration

What you're looking for are static methods. To declare a method static do it like this
#staticmethod
def foo():
pass

Nothing. Just let it be, Python won't complain about it and there's nothing fundamentally wrong about methods that doesn't use its instance. If your linter complains about it, you can shut up that warning. These kind of helper functions are often intended to be private methods that aren't intended to be used externally, you may want to prefix the name with underscore to indicate that.
Convert it into a free function. Python is an OOP language, but it's also a mixed paradigm language, unlike Java, for example, you can actually create a function outside of a class declaration. Pythonic code does not necessarily means putting everything into classes, and often a free function is perfectly suitable place for functions that doesn't involve a particular object instance.
def get_t(t):
return t*t
class example:
def main(self):
b=1
k=self.get_t(b)
If you want to be able to call it from the class by doing Example.get_t(blah) without having to have an instance, then you can either use the staticmethod or classmethod decorator. I suggest using classmethod which can do everything that staticmethod can do while the reverse isn't true and it's easier to make classmethod work correctly when you need to override it in a multi inheritance situation. staticmethod has a very tiny performance advantage, but you're microoptimizing if that's your concern.
class example:
#classmethod
def get_t(cls, t):
return t*t
def main(self):
b=1
k=self.get_t(b)
If get_t() is only being called from one method, you can put it as an inner function of that method:
class example:
def main(self):
def get_t(t):
return t * t
b=1
k=self.get_t(b)
With regards to naming, get_xxx is usually a code smell in python. The get_ prefix indicates that the method is likely a getter, and pythonic code usually don't use getters/setters, because the language supports property. What you have on here though, isn't actually a getter but rather a computation method, so it shouldn't be prefixed with get_. A better name might be calculate_t(t) or square(t).

Case 1: If self is there:-
class example:
def get_t(self,t):
return t*t
Then You can not access get_t function directly from class example like example.get_t(t=2) ,it will give you error. But you can access now by creating an object of class like q = example() and then q.get_t(t=2) , it will give you your desired result.
Case 2 : If self is not there:-
class example:
def get_t(t):
return t*t
Now You can directly access get_t function by class example like example.get_t(t=2) ,it will give you your desired result. But now you cannot use get_t function by creating object like q = example() then q.get_t(t=2) it will give you error.
Conclusion :- It all depends on your use case. But when you struck in this type of ambiguity use #staticmethod like given below:-
class example:
#staticmethod
def get_t(t):
return t*t
I hope it may help you.

How to best initialize an object of a subclass using an object from the parent class?

I want to create a subclass of a class of an existing package (whose source code I don't want to/cannot change). The objects of the class are initialized just using a string and then populated later on using all kind of add functions. A minimal example could look like this (without any add functions):
import copy
class Origin(object):
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
self.dummy_list = [1, 2, 'a']
self.dummy_stuff = {'a': [12, 'yt']}
def make_copy(self):
return copy.deepcopy(self)
def dummy_function(self):
return len(self.dummy_list)
I want to create a subclass in such a way that I can initialize its instances using an instance of Origin. A straightforward way would be
class BasedOnOrigin(Origin):
def __init__(self, origin_instance, new_prop):
Origin.__init__(self, origin_instance.name)
self.dummy_list = copy.deepcopy(origin_instance.dummy_list)
self.dummy_stuff = copy.deepcopy(origin_instance.dummy_stuff)
self.new_prop = new_prop
The annoying thing there is, that I need to copy all kind of things which I need to know about in advance.
Another option would be
class BasedOnOrigin2(Origin):
def __init__(self, origin_instance, new_prop):
Origin.__init__(self, origin_instance.name)
self = origin_instance.make_copy()
self.new_prop = new_prop
but the self = part looks rather non-standard and new_prop is not set, so I would need an extra function for this.
Is there a standard way of doing this?
An alternative to the above would be to add the additional functions to existing instances using e.g.
from functools import partial
def add_function(obj, func):
setattr(obj, func.__name__, partial(func, obj))
but this can be annoying if there are (i) a lot of functions to add and (ii) a lot of instances to which one wants to add functions.

but the self = part looks rather non-standard and new_prop is not set
self is just a plain local variable, so rebinding it only effects the local scope indeed.
Is there a standard way of doing this?
From what you describe it looks like your real problem is that you have instances of class created by another lib that you don't want / cannot modify and what you really want is to add new methods (and eventually override some methods) to those objects, but cannot since you can tell this lib to use your own class instead.
If the point is purely and simply "replace" the original class with your own version of it (so all instances of the original class are impacted by the change), the canonical solution is to monkeypatch the original class:
from otherlib import TheClass
def patch_the_class():
# we do this in a function to avoid
# polluting the global namespace
# add a new method
def newmethod(self):
# code here
TheClass.newmethod = newmethod
# override an existing method
# keep a reference to the original so
# we can still use it:
_original = TheClass.some_method
def mymethod(self, arg):
something = _original(self, arg)
# additional stuff here
return something
TheClass.some_method = mymethod
patch_the_class()
Just make sure this is executed before any use of the patched class and you're done.
The pro of this solution (wrt/ patching each instance individually) is a lesser cost and the assurance that no one will ever forget to patch an instance.
Now note that monkeypatches are to be considered as either a temporary workaround or a last-resort hack. If the lib you are patching is OSS, you can modify it to either improve the original class or implement some way to make the concrete class to use configurable and contribute it back.

I think the best approach is defining a function that will extend original origin instance without copying it e.g.
def exdend(*origin_instances):
def my_function_one(self):
pass
def my_function_two(self):
pass
for origin_instance in origin_instances:
setattr(origin_instance, my_function_one.__name__, partial(my_function_one, origin_instance))
setattr(origin_instance, my_function_two.__name__, partial(my_function_two, origin_instance))
return origin_instances

Difficulties with re-using a variable

here is a part of my code :
class projet(object):
def nameCouche(self):
valLissage = float(ui.valLissage.displayText())
return (valLissage)
valCouche = nameCouche() # asks for a positional argument but 'self' doesnt work
def choixTraitement(self):
ui.okLissage.clicked.connect(p.goLissage)
def goLissage(self, valCouche):
if ui.chkboxLissage.isChecked():
print(valCouche) # result is False
os.system(r'"C:\Program Files\FME\fme.exe" D:\Stelios\..... --MAX_NUM_POINTS {0}'.format(valCouche))
So I would like to use valCouche in goLissage method but it doesnt work.
I thought that valCouche would have the argument of valLissage but instead it gives False as a value.
I've tried different alternatives but still doesnt work.

You've got multiple problems here.
First, if you write this in the middle of a class definition:
valCouche = nameCouche()
... you're creating a class attribute, which is shared by all instances, not a normal instance attribute.
Also, you're running this at class definition time. That means there is no self yet--there aren't any instances yet to be self--so you can't call a method like nameCouche, because you don't have anything to call it on.
What you want to do is call the method at instance initialization time, on the instance being initialized, and store the return value in an instance attribute:
def __init__(self):
self.valCouche = self.nameCouche()
Then, when you want to access this value in another method later, you have to access it as self.valCouche.
If you make those changes, it will work. But your object model still doesn't make much sense. Why is nameCouche a method when it doesn't have anything to do with the object, and doesn't access any of its attributes? Maybe it makes sense as a #staticmethod, but really, I think it makes more sense just as a plain function outside the class. In fact, none of the code you've written seems to have anything to do with the class.
This kind of cram-everything-into-the-class design is often a sign that you're trying to write Java code in Python, and haven't yet really understood how Python does OO. You might want to read a good tutorial on Python classes. But briefly: if you're writing a class just to have somewhere to dump a bunch of vaguely-related functions, what you want is a module, not a class. If you have some reason to have instances of that class, and the functions all act on the data of each instance, then you want a class.

You have to declare variabile in the __init__ method (constructor) and then use it in your code
ex:
class projet(object):
def __init__(self):
self.valCouche = ''
def nameCouche(self):
valLissage = float(ui.valLissage.displayText())
return (valLissage)
def choixTraitement(self):
ui.okLissage.clicked.connect(p.goLissage)
def goLissage(self, valCouche):
if ui.chkboxLissage.isChecked():
self.valCouche = self.nameCouche()
print(self.valCouche) # result is False
os.system(r'"C:\Program Files\FME\fme.exe" D:\Stelios\..... --MAX_NUM_POINTS {0}'.format(self.valCouche))

you have to define an initialization function: def__init__(self)
defining valCouche as an instance attribute make it accessible on all the method so we have the following
class projet(object):
def __init__(self):
self.valCouche = ''
def nameCouche(self):
self.valCouche = float(ui.valLissage.displayText())
#staticmethod #here there is no need for self so it is a method of class
def choixTraitement():
ui.okLissage.clicked.connect(p.goLissage)
def goLissage(self):
if ui.chkboxLissage.isChecked():
print(self.valCouche) # result is False
os.system(r'"C:\Program Files\FME\fme.exe" D:\Stelios\..... --MAX_NUM_POINTS {0}'.format(self.valCouche))

Classes in python, how to set an attributes

When I write class in python, most of the time, I am eager to set variables I use, as properties of the object. Is there any rule or general guidelines about which variables should be used as class/instance attribute and which should not?
for example:
class simple(object):
def __init(self):
a=2
b=3
return a*b
class simple(object):
def __init(self):
self.a=2
self.b=3
return a*b
While I completely understand the attributes should be a property of the object. This is simple to understand when the class declaration is simple but as the program goes longer and longer and there are many places where the data exchange between various modules should be done, I get confused on where I should use a/b or self.a/self.b. Is there any guidelines for this?

Where you use self.a you are creating a property, so this can be accessed from outside the class and persists beyond that function. These should be used for storing data about the object.
Where you use a it is a local variable, and only lasts while in the scope of that function, so should be used where you are only using it within the function (as in this case).
Note that __init is misleading, as it looks like __init__ - but isn't the constructor. If you intended them to be the constructor, then it makes no sense to return a value (as the new object is what is returned).

class Person(object):
def __init__(self, name):
# Introduce all instance variables on __init__
self.name = name
self.another = None
def get_name(self):
# get_name has access to the `instance` variable 'name'
return self.name
So if you want a variable to be available on more than one method, make
it an instance variable.
Notice my comment on introducing all instance vars on __init__.
Although the example below is valid python don't do it.
class Person(object):
def __init__(self):
self.a = 0
def foo(self):
self.b = 1 # Whoa, introduced new instance variable
Instead initialize all your instance variables on __init__ and set
them to None if no other value is appropriate for them.

I try to imagine what I want the API of my class to look like prior to implementing it. I think to myself, If I didn't write this class, would I want to read the documentation about what this particular variable does? If reading that documentation would simply waste my time, then it should probably be a local variable.
Occasionally, you need to preserve some information, but you wouldn't necessarily want that to be part of the API, which is when you use the convention of appending an underscore. e.g. self._some_data_that_is_not_part_of_the_api.

The self parameter refers to the object itself. So if you need to use on of the class attributes outside of the class you would it call it as the name of class instance and the attribute name. I don't think there is any guideline on when to use self, it all depends on your need. When you are building a class you should try to think about what you will use the variables you creating for. If you know for sure that you will need that specific attribute in the program you are importing your class, then add self.