We Keep Coding

Pyramids and Oblique Cones in MEEP

Apologies if this is not the right place for this question.
I've recently started using MIT's MEEP software (Python3, on Linux). I am quite new to it and would like to mostly use it for photovoltaics projects. Somewhat common shapes that show up here are "inverted pyramid" and slanted (oblique) cone structures. Creating shapes in MEEP seems to generally be done with the GeometricObject class, but they don't seem to directly support either of these structures. Is there any way around this or is my only real option simulating these structures by stacking small Block objects?
As described in my own "answer" posted, it's not too difficult to just define these geometric objects myself, write a function to check if it's inside the object, and return the appropriate material. How would I go about converting this to a MEEP GeometricObject, instead of converting that to a material_func as I've done?

No responses, so I thought I'd post my hacky way around it. There are two solutions: First is as mentioned in the question, just stacking MEEP's Block object. The other approach I did was define my own class Pyramid, which works basically the same way as described here. Then, I convert a list of my class objects and MEEP's shape object to a function that takes a vector and returns a material, and this is fed as material_func in MEEP's Simulation object. So far, it seems to work, hence I'm posting it as an answer. However, It substantially slows down subpixel averaging (and maybe the rest of the simulation, though I haven't done an actual analysis), so I'm not very happy with it.
I'm not sure which is "better" but the second method does feel more precise, insofar that you have pyramids, not just a stack of Blocks.

What is the proper way to work with ramp nodes using the Maya 2016 SP6 Python 2.0 API?

I am new to programming using the Python 2.0 API (have used the Python Maya.cmds a fair bit). As I understand it, I should be able to manipulate a ramp node referenced via an MObject using the corresponding ramp node function set. Unfortunately, I have not been able to find any examples on how to properly do this, or even any real clear information on what the function set is called. In the API documentation, there is an "MRampAttribute" class, and the description says that it is in fact the "Functionset for creating and working with ramp attributes." Unfortunately, I haven't had any luck getting it to work...
I did find another possibly relevant piece of information here, which is a short list of the compatible function sets for a ramp node, and included the following: kBase, kNamedObject, kDependencyNode, kTexture2d, and kRamp. Unfortunately, I have not really been able to find documentation on these function sets, aside from them appearing in a list of constants under the MFn class.
Ideally, it would be great to have a very simple example that shows the following:
Properly store a ramp node (ramp texture node?) that already exists in the scene in an MObject
Create an instance of the proper ramp node function set and have it set up to act on the ramp node reference
Use the function set to do something simple, like changing or adding a color entry
I guess one last thing to note is that I am trying to work with color ramps (gradient ramps), as opposed to the curve(?) ramp, since it seems they are closely related.
Thank you!
Update: It's looking more and more like the issue may be that the Python 2.0 API is very incomplete, particularly since this straight Maya 2016 SP6 with no extensions. Was looking into some other issues and it appears basic things like MItDag were added in extension 2, and are not available in the base version...
TL;DR - I cannot seem to find the function set that is supposed to operate on ramp nodes in Maya 2016 SP6 using the Python 2.0 API. A simple working example code snippet would be greatly appreciated as a place to get started.

The Ramp node isn't particularly special except that the .colorEntryList property is a compound array attribute; it doesn't get a special function set. And, confusingly, .colorEntryList is not an MRampAttribute, it's just a regular indexed compound attribute.
test = cmds.createNode('ramp')
node = om.MGlobal.getSelectionListByName(test).getDependNode(0)
depfn = om.MFnDependencyNode(node)
compound_plug = depfn.findPlug("colorEntryList", False)
for idx in range(compound_plug.numElements()):
index_plug = compound_plug.elementByPhysicalIndex(idx)
pos_handle = index_plug.child(0).asMDataHandle()
color_handle = index_plug.child(1).asMDataHandle()
print idx, pos_handle.asFloat(), ":", color_handle.asFloat3()
You'll notice that the elements are not in the order you'd expect, youll need to check the position values in pos_handle to find the one you want. The other attributes on the node are just generic properties.
If you're not doing this inside an MPxCommand, you probably just want to do this with maya.cmds, it's less of a hassle and the speed difference is not likely to matter if this is a tool operation.

python program structure and use of global variables

I have a program completed that does the following:
1)Reads formatted data (a sequence of numbers and associated labels) from serial port in real time.
2)Does minor manipulations to data.
3)plots data in real time in a gui I wrote using pyqt.
4)Updates data stats in the gui.
5)Allows post analysis of the data after collection is stopped.
There are two dialogs (separate classes) that are called from within the main window in order to select certain preferences in plotting and statistics.
My question is the following: Right now my data is read in and declared as several global variables that are appended to as data comes in 20x per second or so - a 2d list of values for the numerical values and 1d lists for the various associated text values. Would it be better to create a class in which to store data and its various attributes, and then to use instances of this data class to make everything else happen - like the plotting of the data and the statistics associated with it?
I have a hunch that the answer is yes, but I need a bit of guidance on how to make this happen if it is the best way forward. For instance, would every single datum be a new instance of the data class? Would I then pass them one by one or as a list of instances to the other classes and to methods? How should the passing most elegantly be done?
If I'm not being specific enough, please let me know what other information would help me get a good answer.

A reasonably good rule of thumb is that if what you are doing needs more than 20 lines of code it is worth considering using an object oriented design rather than global variables, and if you get to 100 lines you should already be using classes. The purists will probably say never use globals but IMHO for a simple linear script it is probably overkill.
Be warned that you will probably get a lot of answers expressing horror that you are not already.
There are some really good, (and some of them free), books that introduce you to object oriented programming in python a quick google should provide the help you need.
Added Comments to the answer to preserve them:
So at 741 lines, I'll take that as a yes to OOP:) So specifically on the data class. Is it correct to create a new instance of the data class 20x per second as data strings come in, or is it more appropriate to append to some data list of an existing instance of the class? Or is there no clear preference either way? – TimoB
I would append/extend your existing instance. – seth
I think I see the light now. I can instantiate the data class when the "start data" button is pressed, and append to that instance in the subsequent thread that does the serial reading. THANKS! – TimoB

How do I design a class in Python?

I've had some really awesome help on my previous questions for detecting paws and toes within a paw, but all these solutions only work for one measurement at a time.
Now I have data that consists off:
about 30 dogs;
each has 24 measurements (divided into several subgroups);
each measurement has at least 4 contacts (one for each paw) and
each contact is divided into 5 parts and
has several parameters, like contact time, location, total force etc.
Obviously sticking everything into one big object isn't going to cut it, so I figured I needed to use classes instead of the current slew of functions. But even though I've read Learning Python's chapter about classes, I fail to apply it to my own code (GitHub link)
I also feel like it's rather strange to process all the data every time I want to get out some information. Once I know the locations of each paw, there's no reason for me to calculate this again. Furthermore, I want to compare all the paws of the same dog to determine which contact belongs to which paw (front/hind, left/right). This would become a mess if I continue using only functions.
So now I'm looking for advice on how to create classes that will let me process my data (link to the zipped data of one dog) in a sensible fashion.

How to design a class.
Write down the words. You started to do this. Some people don't and wonder why they have problems.
Expand your set of words into simple statements about what these objects will be doing. That is to say, write down the various calculations you'll be doing on these things. Your short list of 30 dogs, 24 measurements, 4 contacts, and several "parameters" per contact is interesting, but only part of the story. Your "locations of each paw" and "compare all the paws of the same dog to determine which contact belongs to which paw" are the next step in object design.
Underline the nouns. Seriously. Some folks debate the value of this, but I find that for first-time OO developers it helps. Underline the nouns.
Review the nouns. Generic nouns like "parameter" and "measurement" need to be replaced with specific, concrete nouns that apply to your problem in your problem domain. Specifics help clarify the problem. Generics simply elide details.
For each noun ("contact", "paw", "dog", etc.) write down the attributes of that noun and the actions in which that object engages. Don't short-cut this. Every attribute. "Data Set contains 30 Dogs" for example is important.
For each attribute, identify if this is a relationship to a defined noun, or some other kind of "primitive" or "atomic" data like a string or a float or something irreducible.
For each action or operation, you have to identify which noun has the responsibility, and which nouns merely participate. It's a question of "mutability". Some objects get updated, others don't. Mutable objects must own total responsibility for their mutations.
At this point, you can start to transform nouns into class definitions. Some collective nouns are lists, dictionaries, tuples, sets or namedtuples, and you don't need to do very much work. Other classes are more complex, either because of complex derived data or because of some update/mutation which is performed.
Don't forget to test each class in isolation using unittest.
Also, there's no law that says classes must be mutable. In your case, for example, you have almost no mutable data. What you have is derived data, created by transformation functions from the source dataset.

The following advices (similar to #S.Lott's advice) are from the book, Beginning Python: From Novice to Professional
Write down a description of your problem (what should the problem do?). Underline all the nouns, verbs, and adjectives.
Go through the nouns, looking for potential classes.
Go through the verbs, looking for potential methods.
Go through the adjectives, looking for potential attributes
Allocate methods and attributes to your classes
To refine the class, the book also advises we can do the following:
Write down (or dream up) a set of use cases—scenarios of how your program may be used. Try to cover all the functionally.
Think through every use case step by step, making sure that everything we need is covered.

I like the TDD approach...
So start by writing tests for what you want the behaviour to be. And write code that passes. At this point, don't worry too much about design, just get a test suite and software that passes. Don't worry if you end up with a single big ugly class, with complex methods.
Sometimes, during this initial process, you'll find a behaviour that is hard to test and needs to be decomposed, just for testability. This may be a hint that a separate class is warranted.
Then the fun part... refactoring. After you have working software you can see the complex pieces. Often little pockets of behaviour will become apparent, suggesting a new class, but if not, just look for ways to simplify the code. Extract service objects and value objects. Simplify your methods.
If you're using git properly (you are using git, aren't you?), you can very quickly experiment with some particular decomposition during refactoring, and then abandon it and revert back if it doesn't simplify things.
By writing tested working code first you should gain an intimate insight into the problem domain that you couldn't easily get with the design-first approach. Writing tests and code push you past that "where do I begin" paralysis.

The whole idea of OO design is to make your code map to your problem, so when, for example, you want the first footstep of a dog, you do something like:
dog.footstep(0)
Now, it may be that for your case you need to read in your raw data file and compute the footstep locations. All this could be hidden in the footstep() function so that it only happens once. Something like:
class Dog:
def __init__(self):
self._footsteps=None
def footstep(self,n):
if not self._footsteps:
self.readInFootsteps(...)
return self._footsteps[n]
[This is now a sort of caching pattern. The first time it goes and reads the footstep data, subsequent times it just gets it from self._footsteps.]
But yes, getting OO design right can be tricky. Think more about the things you want to do to your data, and that will inform what methods you'll need to apply to what classes.

After skimming your linked code, it seems to me that you are better off not designing a Dog class at this point. Rather, you should use Pandas and dataframes. A dataframe is a table with columns. You dataframe would have columns such as: dog_id, contact_part, contact_time, contact_location, etc.
Pandas uses Numpy arrays behind the scenes, and it has many convenience methods for you:
Select a dog by e.g. : my_measurements['dog_id']=='Charly'
save the data: my_measurements.save('filename.pickle')
Consider using pandas.read_csv() instead of manually reading the text files.

Writing out your nouns, verbs, adjectives is a great approach, but I prefer to think of class design as asking the question what data should be hidden?
Imagine you had a Query object and a Database object:
The Query object will help you create and store a query -- store, is the key here, as a function could help you create one just as easily. Maybe you could stay: Query().select('Country').from_table('User').where('Country == "Brazil"'). It doesn't matter exactly the syntax -- that is your job! -- the key is the object is helping you hide something, in this case the data necessary to store and output a query. The power of the object comes from the syntax of using it (in this case some clever chaining) and not needing to know what it stores to make it work. If done right the Query object could output queries for more then one database. It internally would store a specific format but could easily convert to other formats when outputting (Postgres, MySQL, MongoDB).
Now let's think through the Database object. What does this hide and store? Well clearly it can't store the full contents of the database, since that is why we have a database! So what is the point? The goal is to hide how the database works from people who use the Database object. Good classes will simplify reasoning when manipulating internal state. For this Database object you could hide how the networking calls work, or batch queries or updates, or provide a caching layer.
The problem is this Database object is HUGE. It represents how to access a database, so under the covers it could do anything and everything. Clearly networking, caching, and batching are quite hard to deal with depending on your system, so hiding them away would be very helpful. But, as many people will note, a database is insanely complex, and the further from the raw DB calls you get, the harder it is to tune for performance and understand how things work.
This is the fundamental tradeoff of OOP. If you pick the right abstraction it makes coding simpler (String, Array, Dictionary), if you pick an abstraction that is too big (Database, EmailManager, NetworkingManager), it may become too complex to really understand how it works, or what to expect. The goal is to hide complexity, but some complexity is necessary. A good rule of thumb is to start out avoiding Manager objects, and instead create classes that are like structs -- all they do is hold data, with some helper methods to create/manipulate the data to make your life easier. For example, in the case of EmailManager start with a function called sendEmail that takes an Email object. This is a simple starting point and the code is very easy to understand.
As for your example, think about what data needs to be together to calculate what you are looking for. If you wanted to know how far an animal was walking, for example, you could have AnimalStep and AnimalTrip (collection of AnimalSteps) classes. Now that each Trip has all the Step data, then it should be able to figure stuff out about it, perhaps AnimalTrip.calculateDistance() makes sense.

How many private variables are too many? Capsulizing classes? Class Practices?

Okay so i am currently working on an inhouse statistics package for python, its mainly geared towards a combination of working with arcgis geoprocessor, for modeling comparasion and tools.
Anyways, so i have a single class, that calculates statistics. Lets just call it Stats. Now my Stats class, is getting to the point of being very large. It uses statistics calculated by other statistics, to calculate other statistics sets, etc etc. This leads to alot of private variables, that are kept simply to prevent recalculation. however there is certain ones, while used quite frequintly they are often only used by one or two key subsections of functionality. (e.g. summation of matrix diagonals, and probabilities). However its starting to become a major eyeesore, and i feel as if i am doing this terribly wrong.
So is this bad?
I was recommended by a coworker, to simply start putting core and common functionality togther, in the main class, then simply having capsules, that take a reference to the main class, and simply do what ever functionality they need to within themselves. E.g. for calculating accuracy of model predictions, i would create a capsule, who simply takes a reference to the parent, and it will offload all of the calculations needed, for model predictions.
Is something like this really a good idea? Is there a better way? Right now i have over a dozen different sub statistics that are dumped to a text file to make a smallish report. The code base is growing, and i would just love it if i could start splitting up more and more of my python classes. I am just not sure really what the best way about doing stuff like this is.

Why not create a class for each statistic you need to compute and when of the statistics requires other, just pass an instance of the latter to the computing method? However, there is little known about your code and required functionalities. Maybe you could describe in a broader fashion, what kind of statistics you need calculate and how they depend on each other?
Anyway, if I had to count certain statistics, I would instantly turn to creating separate class for each of them. I did once, when I was writing code statistics library for python. Every statistic, like how many times class is inherited or how often function was called, was a separate class. This way each of them was simple, however I didn't need to use any of them in the other.

I can think of a couple of solutions. One would be to simply store values in an array with an enum like so:
StatisticType = enum('AveragePerDay','MedianPerDay'...)
Another would be to use a inheritance like so:
class StatisticBase
....
class AveragePerDay ( StatisticBase )
...
class MedianPerDay ( StatisticBase )
...
There is no hard and fast rule on "too many", however a guideline is that if the list of fields, properties, and methods when collapsed, is longer than a single screen full, it's probably too big.

It's a common anti-pattern for a class to become "too fat" (have too much functionality and related state), and while this is commonly observed about "base classes" (whence the "fat base class" monicker for the anti-pattern), it can really happen without any inheritance involved.
Many design patterns (DPs for short_ can help you re-factor your code to whittle down the large, untestable, unmaintainable "fat class" to a nice package of cooperating classes (which can be used through "Facade" DPs for simplicity): consider, for example, State, Strategy, Memento, Proxy.
You could attack this problem directly, but I think, especially since you mention in a comment that you're looking at it as a general class design topic, it may offer you a good opportunity to dig into the very useful field of design patterns, and especially "refactoring to patterns" (Fowler's book by that title is excellent, though it doesn't touch on Python-specific issues).
Specifically, I believe you'll be focusing mostly on a few Structural and Behavioral patterns (since I don't think you have much need for Creational ones for this use case, except maybe "lazy initialization" of some of your expensive-to-compute state that's only needed in certain cases -- see this wikipedia entry for a pretty exhaustive listing of DPs, with classification and links for further explanations of each).

Since you are asking about best practices you might want to check out pylint (http://www.logilab.org/857). It has many good suggestions about code style including ones relating to how many private variables in a class.