Related
I do understand how setattr() works in python, but my question is when i try to dynamically set an attribute and give it an unbound function as a value, so the attribute is a callable, the attribute ends up taking the name of the unbound function when i call attr.__name__ instead of the name of the attribute.
Here's an example:
I have a Filter class:
class Filter:
def __init__(self, column=['poi_id', 'tp.event'], access=['con', 'don']):
self.column = column
self.access = access
self.accessor_column = dict(zip(self.access, self.column))
self.set_conditions()
def condition(self, name):
# i want to be able to get the name of the dynamically set
# function and check `self.accessor_column` for a value, but when
# i do `setattr(self, 'accessor', self.condition)`, the function
# name is always set to `condition` rather than `accessor`
return name
def set_conditions(self):
mapping = list(zip(self.column, self.access))
for i in mapping:
poi_column = i[0]
accessor = i[1]
setattr(self, accessor, self.condition)
In the class above, the set_conditions function dynamically set attributes (con and don) of the Filter class and assigns them a callable, but they retain the initial name of the function.
When i run this:
>>> f = Filter()
>>> print(f.con('linux'))
>>> print(f.con.__name__)
Expected:
linux
con (which should be the name of the dynamically set attribute)
I get:
linux
condition (name of the value (unbound self.condition) of the attribute)
But i expect f.con.__name__ to return the name of the attribute (con) and not the name of the unbound function (condition) assigned to it.
Can someone please explain to me why this behaviour is such and how can i go around it?
Thanks.
function.__name__ is the name under which the function has been initially defined, it has nothing to do with the name under which it is accessed. Actually, the whole point of function.__name__ is to correctly identify the function whatever name is used to access it. You definitly want to read this for more on what Python's "names" are.
One of the possible solutions here is replace the static definition of condition with a closure:
class Filter(object):
def __init__(self, column=['poi_id', 'tp.event'], access=['con', 'don']):
self.column = column
self.access = access
self.accessor_column = dict(zip(self.access, self.column))
self.set_conditions()
def set_conditions(self):
mapping = list(zip(self.column, self.access))
for column_name, accessor_name in mapping:
def accessor(name):
print("in {}.accessor '{}' for column '{}'".format(self, accessor_name, column_name))
return name
# this is now technically useless but helps with inspection
accessor.__name__ = accessor_name
setattr(self, accessor_name, accessor)
As a side note (totally unrelated but I thought you may want to know this), using mutable objects as function arguments defaults is one of the most infamous Python gotchas and may yield totally unexpected results, ie:
>>> f1 = Filter()
>>> f2 = Filter()
>>> f1.column
['poi_id', 'tp.event']
>>> f2.column
['poi_id', 'tp.event']
>>> f2.column.append("WTF")
>>> f1.column
['poi_id', 'tp.event', 'WTF']
EDIT:
thank you for your answer, but it doesn't touch my issue here. My problem is not how functions are named or defined, my problem it that when i use setattr() and i set an attribute and i give it a function as it's value, i can access the value and perform what the value does, but since it's a function, why doesn't it return it's name as the function name
Because as I already explained above, the function's __name__ attribute and the name of the Filter instance attribute(s) refering to this function are totally unrelated, and the function knows absolutely nothing about the names of variables or attributes that reference it, as explained in the reference article I linked to.
Actually the fact that the object you're passing to setattr is a function is totally irrelevant, from the object's POV it's just a name and an object, period. And actually the fact you're binding this object (function or just whatever object) to an instance attribute (whether directly or using setattr(), it works just the same) instead of a plain variable is also totally irrelevant - none of those operation will have any impact on the object that is bound (except for increasing it's ref counter but that's a CPython implementation detail - other implementations may implement garbage collection diffently).
May I suggest you this :
from types import SimpleNamespace
class Filter:
def __init__(self, column=['poi_id', 'tp.event'], access=['con', 'don']):
self.column = column
self.access = access
self.accessor_column = dict(zip(self.access, self.column))
self.set_conditions()
def set_conditions(self):
for i in self.access:
setattr(self, i, SimpleNamespace(name=i, func=lambda name: name))
f = Filter()
print(f.con.func('linux'))
>>> linux
print(f.con.name)
>>> con
[edited after bruno desthuilliers's comment.]
In python how can we create a new object without having a predefined Class and later dynamically add properties to it ?
example:
dynamic_object = Dynamic()
dynamic_object.dynamic_property_a = "abc"
dynamic_object.dynamic_property_b = "abcdefg"
What is the best way to do it?
EDIT Because many people advised in comments that I might not need this.
The thing is that I have a function that serializes an object's properties. For that reason, I don't want to create an object of the expected class due to some constructor restrictions, but instead create a similar one, let's say like a mock, add any "custom" properties I need, then feed it back to the function.
Just define your own class to do it:
class Expando(object):
pass
ex = Expando()
ex.foo = 17
ex.bar = "Hello"
If you take metaclassing approach from #Martijn's answer, #Ned's answer can be rewritten shorter (though it's obviously less readable, but does the same thing).
obj = type('Expando', (object,), {})()
obj.foo = 71
obj.bar = 'World'
Or just, which does the same as above using dict argument:
obj = type('Expando', (object,), {'foo': 71, 'bar': 'World'})()
For Python 3, passing object to bases argument is not necessary (see type documentation).
But for simple cases instantiation doesn't have any benefit, so is okay to do:
ns = type('Expando', (object,), {'foo': 71, 'bar': 'World'})
At the same time, personally I prefer a plain class (i.e. without instantiation) for ad-hoc test configuration cases as simplest and readable:
class ns:
foo = 71
bar = 'World'
Update
In Python 3.3+ there is exactly what OP asks for, types.SimpleNamespace. It's just:
A simple object subclass that provides attribute access to its namespace, as well as a meaningful repr.
Unlike object, with SimpleNamespace you can add and remove attributes. If a SimpleNamespace object is initialized with keyword arguments, those are directly added to the underlying namespace.
import types
obj = types.SimpleNamespace()
obj.a = 123
print(obj.a) # 123
print(repr(obj)) # namespace(a=123)
However, in stdlib of both Python 2 and Python 3 there's argparse.Namespace, which has the same purpose:
Simple object for storing attributes.
Implements equality by attribute names and values, and provides a simple string representation.
import argparse
obj = argparse.Namespace()
obj.a = 123
print(obj.a) # 123
print(repr(obj)) # Namespace(a=123)
Note that both can be initialised with keyword arguments:
types.SimpleNamespace(a = 'foo',b = 123)
argparse.Namespace(a = 'foo',b = 123)
Using an object just to hold values isn't the most Pythonic style of programming. It's common in programming languages that don't have good associative containers, but in Python, you can use use a dictionary:
my_dict = {} # empty dict instance
my_dict["foo"] = "bar"
my_dict["num"] = 42
You can also use a "dictionary literal" to define the dictionary's contents all at once:
my_dict = {"foo":"bar", "num":42}
Or, if your keys are all legal identifiers (and they will be, if you were planning on them being attribute names), you can use the dict constructor with keyword arguments as key-value pairs:
my_dict = dict(foo="bar", num=42) # note, no quotation marks needed around keys
Filling out a dictionary is in fact what Python is doing behind the scenes when you do use an object, such as in Ned Batchelder's answer. The attributes of his ex object get stored in a dictionary, ex.__dict__, which should end up being equal to an equivalent dict created directly.
Unless attribute syntax (e.g. ex.foo) is absolutely necessary, you may as well skip the object entirely and use a dictionary directly.
Use the collections.namedtuple() class factory to create a custom class for your return value:
from collections import namedtuple
return namedtuple('Expando', ('dynamic_property_a', 'dynamic_property_b'))('abc', 'abcdefg')
The returned value can be used both as a tuple and by attribute access:
print retval[0] # prints 'abc'
print retval.dynamic_property_b # prints 'abcdefg'
One way that I found is also by creating a lambda. It can have sideeffects and comes with some properties that are not wanted. Just posting for the interest.
dynamic_object = lambda:expando
dynamic_object.dynamic_property_a = "abc"
dynamic_object.dynamic_property_b = "abcdefg"
I define a dictionary first because it's easy to define. Then I use namedtuple to convert it to an object:
from collections import namedtuple
def dict_to_obj(dict):
return namedtuple("ObjectName", dict.keys())(*dict.values())
my_dict = {
'name': 'The mighty object',
'description': 'Yep! Thats me',
'prop3': 1234
}
my_obj = dict_to_obj(my_dict)
Ned Batchelder's answer is the best. I just wanted to record a slightly different answer here, which avoids the use of the class keyword (in case that's useful for instructive reasons, demonstration of closure, etc.)
Just define your own class to do it:
def Expando():
def inst():
None
return inst
ex = Expando()
ex.foo = 17
ex.bar = "Hello"
What's the easiest way to create a naked object that I can assign attributes to?
The specific use case is: I'm doing various operations on a Django object instance, but sometimes the instance is None (there is on instance). In this case I'd like to create the simplest possible fake object such that I can assign values to its attributes (eg. myobject.foo = 'bar').
Basically I'm looking for the Python equivalent of this piece of Javascript:
myobject = {}
myobject.foo = 'bar'
I know I can use a mock object/library for this, but I'm hoping for a very simple solution (as simple as the Javascript above). Is there a way to create a naked object instance? Something like:
myobject = object()
myobject.foo = 'bar'
You need to create a simple class first:
class Foo(object):
pass
myobject = Foo()
myobject.foo = 'bar'
You can make it a one-liner like this:
myobject = type("Foo", (object,), {})()
myobject.foo = 'bar'
The call to type functions identically to the previous class statement.
If you want to be really minimal...
myobject = type("", (), {})()
The key is that the built-in types (such as list and object) don't support user-defined attributes, so you need to create a type using either a class statement or a call to the 3-parameter version of type.
If you're using Python >= 3.3 you could always use SimpleNamespace; which is included in the Python types module.
SimpleNamespace is great because you also get a repr and equivalency testing for free; both of which might come in handy even for a minimalist object.
Translating the JavaScript in the OP’s question would look like:
from types import SimpleNamespace
myobject = SimpleNamespace() # myobject = {}
myobject.foo = 'bar'
You can also use keyword arguments when instantiating SimpleNamespace. These arguments will become attributes on the instantiated SimpleNamespace:
p = SimpleNamespace(name='gary')
p.age = 32
p # => namespace(age=32, name='gary')
So a quick and easy way to turn a dictionary into a SimpleNamespace object —provided the dictionary keys are proper identifiers— is as simple as:
d = {
'name': 'gary',
'age': 33 # had a birthday.
}
p = SimpleNamespace(**d)
Python >= 3.7 has dataclasses which are basically “mutable named tuples”. This could be something you may want to use if you have a lot of data objects.
Use the Bunch module:
sudo pip install bunch
A bunch is a dictionary that allows to access its content via the dict.key syntax.
And then like that:
from bunch import Bunch
b = Bunch()
b.foo = "Bar"
b["foo2"] = "Bar2"
print b
>> Bunch(foo='Bar', foo2='Bar2')
b["foo"] = "Baz"
print b
>> Bunch(foo='Baz', foo2='Bar2')
I'm coming here very late, but I'm surprised nobody has mentioned namedtuples, which accomplish this kind of thing:
Foo = namedtuple('Foo', ['x'])
f = Foo(x='myattribute')
f.x
For Python 3,
class Obj: pass
o = Obj()
o.name = 'gary'
o.age = 32
o
# <__main__.Obj at 0x17235ca65c0>
o.__dict__
# {'name': 'gary', 'age': 32}
class NakedObject(object):
pass
myobject = NakedObject()
myobject.foo = 'bar'
Functions can have attributes in Python 3. Compared to a naked class, you can save one whole line of code.
naked = lambda: None
naked.foo = 'bar'
You would need to subclass object first like this...
class Myobject(object):
pass
myobject1 = Myobject()
myobject1.foo = 'bar'
Perhaps you are looking for something like this:
myobject={}
myobject['foo']='bar'
then it can be called like:
print myobject['foo']
or you could use a class object for this:
class holder(object):
pass
then you can use something like this:
hold=holder()
hold.myobject='bar'
print hold.myobject
You should probably just use a dict, as per #PsychicOak's answer.
However, if you really want an object you can manipulate, try:
class FooClass(object): pass
You can then assign attributes on FooClass itself, or on instances, as you wish.
I usually prefer to create a null object for my class:
class User(Model):
username = CharField()
password = CharField()
NONE_USER = User(username='', password='')
Then I use it where I would use your naked object.
In some cases extending a dict can help you
like:
class SpecificModelData(dict):
pass
...
class Payload(dict):
... enter code here
why a dict? it works nicely together with serializers.
Why new class? - it gives you a name and a new type
I have a class, and I would like to be able to create multiple objects of that class and place them in an array. I did it like so:
rooms = []
rooms.append(Object1())
...
rooms.append(Object4())
I then have a dict of functions, and I would like to pass the object to the function. However, I'm encountering some problems..For example, I have a dict:
dict = {'look': CallLook(rooms[i])}
I'm able to pass it into the function, however; in the function if I try to call an objects method it gives me problems
def CallLook(current_room)
current_room.examine()
I'm sure that there has to be a better way to do what I'm trying to do, but I'm new to Python and I haven't seen a clean example on how to do this. Anyone have a good way to implement a list of objects to be passed into functions? All of the objects contain the examine method, but they are objects of different classes. (I'm sorry I didn't say so earlier)
The specific error states: TypeError: 'NoneType' object is not callable
Anyone have a good way to implement a list of objects to be passed into functions? All of the objects contain the examine method, but they are objects of different classes. (I'm sorry I didn't say so earlier)
This is Python's plain duck-typing.
class Room:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def examine(self):
return "This %s looks clean!" % self.name
class Furniture:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def examine(self):
return "This %s looks comfortable..." % self.name
def examination(l):
for item in l:
print item.examine()
list_of_objects = [ Room("Living Room"), Furniture("Couch"),
Room("Restrooms"), Furniture("Bed") ]
examination(list_of_objects)
Prints:
This Living Room looks clean!
This Couch looks comfortable...
This Restrooms looks clean!
This Bed looks comfortable...
As for your specific problem: probably you have forgotten to return a value from examine()? (Please post the full error message (including full backtrace).)
I then have a dict of functions, and I would like to pass the object to the function. However, I'm encountering some problems..For example, I have a dict:
my_dict = {'look': CallLook(rooms[i])} # this is no dict of functions
The dict you have created may evaluate to {'look': None} (assuming your examine() doesn't return a value.) Which could explain the error you've observed.
If you wanted a dict of functions you needed to put in a callable, not an actual function call, e.g. like this:
my_dict = {'look': CallLook} # this is a dict of functions
if you want to bind the 'look' to a specific room you could redefine CallLook:
def CallLook(current_room)
return current_room.examine # return the bound examine
my_dict = {'look': CallLook(room[i])} # this is also a dict of functions
Another issue with your code is that you are shadowing the built-in dict() method by naming your local dictionary dict. You shouldn't do this. This yields nasty errors.
Assuming you don't have basic problems (like syntax errors because the code you have pasted is not valid Python), this example shows you how to do what you want:
>>> class Foo():
... def hello(self):
... return 'hello'
...
>>> r = [Foo(),Foo(),Foo()]
>>> def call_method(obj):
... return obj.hello()
...
>>> call_method(r[1])
'hello'
Assuming you have a class Room the usual way to create a list of instances would be using a list comprehension like this
rooms = [Room() for i in range(num_rooms)]
I think there are some things you may not be getting about this:
dict = {'look': CallLook(rooms[i])}
This creates a dict with just one entry: a key 'look', and a value which is the result of evaluating CallLook(rooms[i]) right at the point of that statement. It also then uses the name dict to store this object, so you can no longer use dict as a constructor in that context.
Now, the error you are getting tells us that rooms[i] is None at that point in the programme.
You don't need CallLook (which is also named non-standardly) - you can just use the expression rooms[i].examine(), or if you want to evaluate the call later rooms[i].examine.
You probably don't need the dict at all.
That is not a must, but in some cases, using hasattr() is good... getattr() is another way to get an attribute off an object...
So:
rooms = [Obj1(),Obj2(),Obj3()]
if hasattr(rooms[i], 'examine'):#First check if our object has selected function or attribute...
getattr(rooms[i], 'examine') #that will just evaluate the function do not call it, and equals to Obj1().examine
getattr(rooms[i], 'examine')() # By adding () to the end of getattr function, we evalute and then call the function...
You may also pass parameters to examine function like:
getattr(rooms[i], 'examine')(param1, param2)
I'm not sure of your requirement, but you can use dict to store multiple object of a class.
May be this will help,
>>> class c1():
... print "hi"
...
hi
>>> c = c1()
>>> c
<__main__.c1 instance at 0x032165F8>
>>> d ={}
>>> for i in range (10):
... d[i] = c1()
...
>>> d[0]
<__main__.c1 instance at 0x032166E8>
>>> d[1]
<__main__.c1 instance at 0x032164B8>
>>>
It will create a object of c1 class and store it in dict. Obviously, in this case you can use list instead of dict.
Suppose I have code like:
x = 0
y = 1
z = 2
my_list = [x, y, z]
for item in my_list:
print("handling object ", name(item)) # <--- what would go instead of `name`?
How can I get the name of each object in Python? That is to say: what could I write instead of name in this code, so that the loop will show handling object x and then handling object y and handling object z?
In my actual code, I have a dict of functions that I will call later after looking them up with user input:
def fun1():
pass
def fun2():
pass
def fun3():
pass
fun_dict = {'fun1': fun1,
'fun2': fun2,
'fun3': fun3}
# suppose that we get the name 'fun3' from the user
fun_dict['fun3']()
How can I create fun_dict automatically, without writing the names of the functions twice? I would like to be able to write something like
fun_list = [fun1, fun2, fun3] # and I'll add more as the need arises
fun_dict = {}
for t in fun_list:
fun_dict[name(t)] = t
to avoid duplicating the names.
Objects do not necessarily have names in Python, so you can't get the name.
When you create a variable, like the x, y, z above then those names just act as "pointers" or "references" to the objects. The object itself does not know what name(s) you are using for it, and you can not easily (if at all) get the names of all references to that object.
However, it's not unusual for objects to have a __name__ attribute. Functions do have a __name__ (unless they are lambdas), so we can build fun_dict by doing e.g.
fun_dict = {t.__name__: t for t in fun_list)
That's not really possible, as there could be multiple variables that have the same value, or a value might have no variable, or a value might have the same value as a variable only by chance.
If you really want to do that, you can use
def variable_for_value(value):
for n,v in globals().items():
if v == value:
return n
return None
However, it would be better if you would iterate over names in the first place:
my_list = ["x", "y", "z"] # x, y, z have been previously defined
for name in my_list:
print "handling variable ", name
bla = globals()[name]
# do something to bla
This one-liner works, for all types of objects, as long as they are in globals() dict, which they should be:
def name_of_global_obj(xx):
return [objname for objname, oid in globals().items()
if id(oid)==id(xx)][0]
or, equivalently:
def name_of_global_obj(xx):
for objname, oid in globals().items():
if oid is xx:
return objname
As others have mentioned, this is a really tricky question. Solutions to this are not "one size fits all", not even remotely. The difficulty (or ease) is really going to depend on your situation.
I have come to this problem on several occasions, but most recently while creating a debugging function. I wanted the function to take some unknown objects as arguments and print their declared names and contents. Getting the contents is easy of course, but the declared name is another story.
What follows is some of what I have come up with.
Return function name
Determining the name of a function is really easy as it has the __name__ attribute containing the function's declared name.
name_of_function = lambda x : x.__name__
def name_of_function(arg):
try:
return arg.__name__
except AttributeError:
pass`
Just as an example, if you create the function def test_function(): pass, then copy_function = test_function, then name_of_function(copy_function), it will return test_function.
Return first matching object name
Check whether the object has a __name__ attribute and return it if so (declared functions only). Note that you may remove this test as the name will still be in globals().
Compare the value of arg with the values of items in globals() and return the name of the first match. Note that I am filtering out names starting with '_'.
The result will consist of the name of the first matching object otherwise None.
def name_of_object(arg):
# check __name__ attribute (functions)
try:
return arg.__name__
except AttributeError:
pass
for name, value in globals().items():
if value is arg and not name.startswith('_'):
return name
Return all matching object names
Compare the value of arg with the values of items in globals() and store names in a list. Note that I am filtering out names starting with '_'.
The result will consist of a list (for multiple matches), a string (for a single match), otherwise None. Of course you should adjust this behavior as needed.
def names_of_object(arg):
results = [n for n, v in globals().items() if v is arg and not n.startswith('_')]
return results[0] if len(results) is 1 else results if results else None
If you are looking to get the names of functions or lambdas or other function-like objects that are defined in the interpreter, you can use dill.source.getname from dill. It pretty much looks for the __name__ method, but in certain cases it knows other magic for how to find the name... or a name for the object. I don't want to get into an argument about finding the one true name for a python object, whatever that means.
>>> from dill.source import getname
>>>
>>> def add(x,y):
... return x+y
...
>>> squared = lambda x:x**2
>>>
>>> print getname(add)
'add'
>>> print getname(squared)
'squared'
>>>
>>> class Foo(object):
... def bar(self, x):
... return x*x+x
...
>>> f = Foo()
>>>
>>> print getname(f.bar)
'bar'
>>>
>>> woohoo = squared
>>> plus = add
>>> getname(woohoo)
'squared'
>>> getname(plus)
'add'
Use a reverse dict.
fun_dict = {'fun1': fun1,
'fun2': fun2,
'fun3': fun3}
r_dict = dict(zip(fun_dict.values(), fun_dict.keys()))
The reverse dict will map each function reference to the exact name you gave it in fun_dict, which may or may not be the name you used when you defined the function. And, this technique generalizes to other objects, including integers.
For extra fun and insanity, you can store the forward and reverse values in the same dict. I wouldn't do that if you were mapping strings to strings, but if you are doing something like function references and strings, it's not too crazy.
Note that while, as noted, objects in general do not and cannot know what variables are bound to them, functions defined with def do have names in the __name__ attribute (the name used in def). Also if the functions are defined in the same module (as in your example) then globals() will contain a superset of the dictionary you want.
def fun1:
pass
def fun2:
pass
def fun3:
pass
fun_dict = {}
for f in [fun1, fun2, fun3]:
fun_dict[f.__name__] = f
Here's another way to think about it. Suppose there were a name() function that returned the name of its argument. Given the following code:
def f(a):
return a
b = "x"
c = b
d = f(c)
e = [f(b), f(c), f(d)]
What should name(e[2]) return, and why?
And the reason I want to have the name of the function is because I want to create fun_dict without writing the names of the functions twice, since that seems like a good way to create bugs.
For this purpose you have a wonderful getattr function, that allows you to get an object by known name. So you could do for example:
funcs.py:
def func1(): pass
def func2(): pass
main.py:
import funcs
option = command_line_option()
getattr(funcs, option)()
I know This is late answer.
To get func name , you can use func.__name__
To get the name of any python object that has no name or __name__ method. You can iterate over its module members.
Ex:.
# package.module1.py
obj = MyClass()
# package.module2.py
import importlib
def get_obj_name(obj):
mod = Obj.__module__ # This is necessary to
module = module = importlib.import_module(mod)
for name, o in module.__dict__.items():
if o == obj:
return name
Performance note: don't use it in large modules.
Variable names can be found in the globals() and locals() dicts. But they won't give you what you're looking for above. "bla" will contain the value of each item of my_list, not the variable.
Generally when you are wanting to do something like this, you create a class to hold all of these functions and name them with some clear prefix cmd_ or the like. You then take the string from the command, and try to get that attribute from the class with the cmd_ prefixed to it. Now you only need to add a new function/method to the class, and it's available to your callers. And you can use the doc strings for automatically creating the help text.
As described in other answers, you may be able to do the same approach with globals() and regular functions in your module to more closely match what you asked for.
Something like this:
class Tasks:
def cmd_doit(self):
# do it here
func_name = parse_commandline()
try:
func = getattr('cmd_' + func_name, Tasks())
except AttributeError:
# bad command: exit or whatever
func()
I ran into this page while wondering the same question.
As others have noted, it's simple enough to just grab the __name__ attribute from a function in order to determine the name of the function. It's marginally trickier with objects that don't have a sane way to determine __name__, i.e. base/primitive objects like basestring instances, ints, longs, etc.
Long story short, you could probably use the inspect module to make an educated guess about which one it is, but you would have to probably know what frame you're working in/traverse down the stack to find the right one. But I'd hate to imagine how much fun this would be trying to deal with eval/exec'ed code.
% python2 whats_my_name_again.py
needle => ''b''
['a', 'b']
[]
needle => '<function foo at 0x289d08ec>'
['c']
['foo']
needle => '<function bar at 0x289d0bfc>'
['f', 'bar']
[]
needle => '<__main__.a_class instance at 0x289d3aac>'
['e', 'd']
[]
needle => '<function bar at 0x289d0bfc>'
['f', 'bar']
[]
%
whats_my_name_again.py:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import inspect
class a_class:
def __init__(self):
pass
def foo():
def bar():
pass
a = 'b'
b = 'b'
c = foo
d = a_class()
e = d
f = bar
#print('globals', inspect.stack()[0][0].f_globals)
#print('locals', inspect.stack()[0][0].f_locals)
assert(inspect.stack()[0][0].f_globals == globals())
assert(inspect.stack()[0][0].f_locals == locals())
in_a_haystack = lambda: value == needle and key != 'needle'
for needle in (a, foo, bar, d, f, ):
print("needle => '%r'" % (needle, ))
print([key for key, value in locals().iteritems() if in_a_haystack()])
print([key for key, value in globals().iteritems() if in_a_haystack()])
foo()
You define a class and add the Unicode private function insert the class like
class example:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def __unicode__(self):
return self.name
Of course you have to add extra variable self.name which is the name of the object.
Here is my answer, I am also using globals().items()
def get_name_of_obj(obj, except_word = ""):
for name, item in globals().items():
if item == obj and name != except_word:
return name
I added except_word because I want to filter off some word used in for loop.
If you didn't add it, the keyword in for loop may confuse this function, sometimes the keyword like "each_item" in the following case may show in the function's result, depends on what you have done to your loop.
eg.
for each_item in [objA, objB, objC]:
get_name_of_obj(obj, "each_item")
eg.
>>> objA = [1, 2, 3]
>>> objB = ('a', {'b':'thi is B'}, 'c')
>>> for each_item in [objA, objB]:
... get_name_of_obj(each_item)
...
'objA'
'objB'
>>>
>>>
>>> for each_item in [objA, objB]:
... get_name_of_obj(each_item)
...
'objA'
'objB'
>>>
>>>
>>> objC = [{'a1':'a2'}]
>>>
>>> for item in [objA, objB, objC]:
... get_name_of_obj(item)
...
'objA'
'item' <<<<<<<<<< --------- this is no good
'item'
>>> for item in [objA, objB]:
... get_name_of_obj(item)
...
'objA'
'item' <<<<<<<<--------this is no good
>>>
>>> for item in [objA, objB, objC]:
... get_name_of_obj(item, "item")
...
'objA'
'objB' <<<<<<<<<<--------- now it's ok
'objC'
>>>
Hope this can help.
Based on what it looks like you're trying to do you could use this approach.
In your case, your functions would all live in the module foo. Then you could:
import foo
func_name = parse_commandline()
method_to_call = getattr(foo, func_name)
result = method_to_call()
Or more succinctly:
import foo
result = getattr(foo, parse_commandline())()
Python has names which are mapped to objects in a hashmap called a namespace. At any instant in time, a name always refers to exactly one object, but a single object can be referred to by any arbitrary number of names. Given a name, it is very efficient for the hashmap to look up the single object which that name refers to. However given an object, which as mentioned can be referred to by multiple names, there is no efficient way to look up the names which refer to it. What you have to do is iterate through all the names in the namespace and check each one individually and see if it maps to your given object. This can easily be done with a list comprehension:
[k for k,v in locals().items() if v is myobj]
This will evaluate to a list of strings containing the names of all local "variables" which are currently mapped to the object myobj.
>>> a = 1
>>> this_is_also_a = a
>>> this_is_a = a
>>> b = "ligma"
>>> c = [2,3, 534]
>>> [k for k,v in locals().items() if v is a]
['a', 'this_is_also_a', 'this_is_a']
Of course locals() can be substituted with any dict that you want to search for names that point to a given object. Obviously this search can be slow for very large namespaces because they must be traversed in their entirety.
Hi there is one way to get the variable name that stores an instance of a class
is to use
locals()
function, it returns a dictionary that contains the variable name as a string and its value