We Keep Coding

Not sure why I'm stuck in a Python stuck recursion loop

The add and mul definitions here are nonsensical because of their dependence on returning self, causing infinite loops. If they create a new distribution using the lambdas then it works fine, as in my own answer below.
I'm just playing around with classes and overriding trying to build a small statistics tool. However, when I run this code I get stuck in a recursion loop inside the __mul__ call which is being run in the n1.pdf call and I cannot figure out why. I think it has something to do with Python lazily executing the __mul__ instead of doing what I kind of 'wanted' (let's say in the language of CS) which was to create a new pointer to the old function call for pdf that is owned by the new pointer to pdf, and then to set the old pointer (the main .pdf pointer) to the new function.
I think this is quite poorly worded so edits extremely welcome if you understand what I'm asking.
import math
import random
class Distribution:
def __init__(self, pdf, cdf):
self.pdf = pdf
self.cdf = cdf
def pdf(self, x):
return self.pdf(x)
def cdf(self, x):
return self.cdf(x)
def __mul__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, float) or isinstance(other, int):
newpdf = lambda x : self.pdf(x) * other
self.pdf = newpdf
newcdf = lambda x : self.cdf(x) * other
self.cdf = newcdf
return self
else:
return NotImplemented
def __add__(self, other):
self.pdf = lambda x : self.pdf(x) + other.pdf(x)
self.cdf = lambda x : self.cdf(x) + other.cdf(x)
return Distribution(self.pdf, self.cdf)
class Normal(Distribution):
def __init__(self, mean, stdev):
self.mean = mean
self.stdev = stdev
def pdf(self, x):
return (1.0 / math.sqrt(2 * math.pi * self.stdev ** 2)) * math.exp(-0.5 * (x - self.mean) ** 2 / self.stdev ** 2)
def cdf(self, x):
return (1 + math.erf((x - self.mean) / math.sqrt(2) / self.stdev)) / 2
def sample(self):
return self.mean + self.stdev * math.sqrt(2) * math.cos(2 * math.pi * random.random())
if __name__ == "__main__":
n1 = Normal(1,2)
n1half = n1 * 0.5
x = n1.pdf(1)
print(x)
p.s. I know that it is no longer a pdf after being multiplied by 0.5, this is not an issue.

class Distribution:
...
def pdf(self, x):
return self.pdf(x)
pdf() calls itself, which calls itself, which calls itself... infinitely.
Same with cdf().

def pdf(self, x):
return self.pdf(x)
def cdf(self, x):
return self.cdf(x)
I assume your intent is to delegate to the attributes. Since they are always assigned, they will be found (assuming you do the lookup on an instance) instead of the class methods (which would straightforwardly be infinite recursion without those attributes); but this in turn means that these class methods are just useless. x.cdf(y), where cdf is a callable instance attribute, just works; there is no need to provide a method as well.
newpdf = lambda x : self.pdf(x) * other
self.pdf = newpdf
I assume your intent is to create a new function that relies upon the existing value of self.pdf. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. The problem is that the lambda is late binding. When it executes, that is the time at which it will look up self.pdf... and find itself.
There is a separate problem here, in that you are writing __mul__ and __add__ implementations - that is, the * and + operators, which are supposed to return a new value, and not mutate either operand. (If you wrote a = 3 and b = 4 and then c = a * b, you would be extremely surprised if the values of a or b changed, yes?)
We can solve both problems at once, by simply using the computed pdf and cdf to create a new instance (which we need anyway):
def __mul__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, float) or isinstance(other, int):
newpdf = lambda x : self.pdf(x) * other
newcdf = lambda x : self.cdf(x) * other
return Distribution(newpdf, newcdf)
else:
return NotImplemented
Similarly, __add__ should use local variables, rather than modifying self:
def __add__(self, other):
newpdf = lambda x : self.pdf(x) + other.pdf(x)
newcdf = lambda x : self.cdf(x) + other.cdf(x)
return Distribution(newpdf, newcdf)
Note that implementing these methods also gives you the augmented assignment operators *= and += (albeit by creating a new object and rebinding the name).
Let's test it:
if __name__ == "__main__":
n1 = Normal(1,2)
n1half = n1 * 0.5
print(n1.pdf(1))
print(n1half.pdf(1))
n1 += n1
print(n1.pdf(1))
I get:
>py test.py
0.19947114020071635
0.09973557010035818
0.3989422804014327

Thanks for the help #John and #Tom and #bbbbbb... The problem was trying to return self instead of creating a new distribution. If I change the def'n of mul to
def __mul__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, float) or isinstance(other, int):
def newpdf(x):
return self.pdf(x) * other
def newcdf(x):
return self.cdf(x) * other
return Distribution(newpdf, newcdf)
else:
return NotImplemented
Then this solves this problem

How to get output in Real Number instead of complex number?

I made the following code to solve any quadratic polynomial but I want the final output to be a Real Number (Either a whole number or a fraction) but I get Complex numbers like (3+0j). How to convert them?
Here is the Code:-
import cmath
a = float(raw_input("Enter the Coefficient of x^2 :- "))
b = float(raw_input("Enter the coefficient of x :- "))
c = float(raw_input("Enter the value of constant term or c :- "))
d = ((b*b) - (4*a*c))
if d < 0:
print "There are no Real Roots of this equation"
else:
x1 = (((-b) + cmath.sqrt(float(d))) // 2*a)
x2 = (((-b) - cmath.sqrt(float(d))) // 2*a)
if x1 == x2:
print "x = ", x1
else:
print "x = ", x1, "or", x2
Desired Result:- I want the final result to be a Real Number(both Rational and irrational is allowed including fractions)(Like: 4, 4/3 or something like that).

Simply only print the real part, besides you have to devide by 2a
x1 = (((-b) + cmath.sqrt(float(d))) / (2*a))
x2 = (((-b) - cmath.sqrt(float(d))) / (2*a))
if x1 == x2:
print "x = ", x1.real
else:
print "x = ", x1.real, "or", x2.real

You can use a class like Complex and support imaginary solutions as well.
Code taken from http://hplgit.github.io/primer.html/doc/pub/class/._class-solarized005.html
class Complex(object):
def __init__(self, real, imag=0.0):
self.real = real
self.imag = imag
def __add__(self, other):
return Complex(self.real + other.real,
self.imag + other.imag)
def __sub__(self, other):
return Complex(self.real - other.real,
self.imag - other.imag)
def __mul__(self, other):
return Complex(self.real*other.real - self.imag*other.imag,
self.imag*other.real + self.real*other.imag)
def __div__(self, other):
sr, si, or, oi = self.real, self.imag, \
other.real, other.imag # short forms
r = float(or**2 + oi**2)
return Complex((sr*or+si*oi)/r, (si*or-sr*oi)/r)
def __abs__(self):
return sqrt(self.real**2 + self.imag**2)
def __neg__(self): # defines -c (c is Complex)
return Complex(-self.real, -self.imag)
def __eq__(self, other):
return self.real == other.real and self.imag == other.imag
def __ne__(self, other):
return not self.__eq__(other)
def __str__(self):
return '(%g, %g)' % (self.real, self.imag)
def __repr__(self):
return 'Complex' + str(self)
def __pow__(self, power):
raise NotImplementedError\
('self**power is not yet impl. for Complex')

Manipulating Python Magic Methods

I have more of a background with data science libraries or calling methods and attributes from classes. I am experimenting with manipulating magic methods. I am having a difficult time getting bool types and returning their opposites.
I did something with str and datetime objects that worked but can't seem to to the same with __cmp__, __lt__, __eq__ or `gt'. Here is my code:
class Opposite:
def __cmp__(self, other):
if other.__class__.__name__ == 'bool':
return other
def __lt__(self, other):
if other.__class__.__name__ == 'bool':
return other
def __eq__(self, other):
if other.__class__.__name__ == 'bool':
return other
def __gt__(self, other):
if other.__class__.__name__ == 'bool':
return other
if __name__=="__main__":
""" test class Compare """
a = 1
b = 1
c = a < b
d = a > b
e = a == b
print("Results:\na\t{}\nb\t{}\nc\t{}\nd\t{}\ne\t{}\n".format(a,b,c,d,e))
print("\nType:\na-type\t{}\nb-type\t{}\nc-type\t{}\nd-type\t{}\ne-type\t{}\n"
.format(type(a),type(b),type(c),type(d),type(e)))
This prints the following:
Results:
a 1
b 1
c False
d False
e True
Type:
a-type <class 'int'>
b-type <class 'int'>
c-type <class 'bool'>
d-type <class 'bool'>
e-type <class 'bool'>
As you can see, the results are the same as not using the class at all. I added an __init__ method to print using Opposite and it only prints that if I instantiate the object with something like a = Opposite().
I would like to enter something like a > b, a < b, or a == b, and return the opposite boolean value, True, or False, as an exercise.
I tried several things such as placing the methods under the __init__ method I created, which didn't work either. I read on this and still don't quite understand how to do this with booleans, integers and floats for that matter. The way the methods are above is how I was able to turn datetime objects into strings with __add__, __radd__ and __rsub__ methods.
Thank you for your help.
EDIT
Thanks to your help, I have a better understanding and have completed my small experiment with this code:
class Opposite:
def __init__(self, x):
self._x = x
def __lt__(self, other):
return not self._x < other._x
def __eq__(self, other):
return not self._x == other._x
def __gt__(self, other):
return not self._x > other._x
def __le__(self, other):
return not self._x <= other._x
def __ge__(self, other):
return not self._x >= other._x
def tester(w, x, y, z):
try:
# Original values
a = w < x
b = w > x
c = w == x
d = w <= x
e = w >= x
# Opposite values
f = y < z
g = y > z
h = y == z
i = y <= z
j = y >= z
# Results
k = 'Fail' if a == f else 'Success'
l = 'Fail' if b == g else 'Success'
m = 'Fail' if c == h else 'Success'
n = 'Fail' if d == i else 'Success'
o = 'Fail' if e == j else 'Success'
print('\nComparing {} and {}:\t<\t>\t==\t<=\t>='.format(w, x))
print('Original Values:', end='\t')
print('{0}\t{1}\t{2}\t{3}\t{4}'.format(a, b, c, d, e))
print('Opposite Values:', end='\t')
print('{0}\t{1}\t{2}\t{3}\t{4}'.format(f, g, h, i, j))
print('Comparisons:', end='\t')
print('\t{0}\t{1}\t{2}\t{3}\t{4}'.format(k, l, m, n, o))
except(Exception) as err:
print(err)
if __name__=="__main__":
""" test class Compare """
a = 1
b = 2
c = Opposite(a)
d = Opposite(b)
tester(a, b, c, d)
This prints the following:
Comparing 1 and 2: < > == <= >=
Original Values: True False False True False
Opposite Values: False True True False True
Comparisons: Success Success Success Success Success

If you mean that you want to return the negation of the boolean resulting from the comparison you could do something like
class T:
def __init__(self, x):
self._x = x
def __lt__(self, other):
return not self._x < other._x
t1 = T(1)
t2 = T(2)
print(t1 < t2) #False
Note that in the comparison self._x < other._x you are using the __lt__ method of the int class.

Dependent variable in Python

I would like to define an Integer class in python, where an Integer (called y) can be related to another Integer (called x) and get updated automatically when this Integer x changes. More concretely I would like to have the following behavior
>>> x = Integer(7)
>>> y = x + 2
>>> print y
9
>>> x.set(9)
>>> print y
11
>>> z = x + y
>>> y.set(10)
>>> print z
19
I realize that one can do this in sympy but I am interested in implementing this myself. I would be grateful if someone can please point out how one would go about this in the simplest manner? Thank you.

I've not used Sympy before but here's my attempt:
class Integer(object):
def __init__(self, value_or_callback):
if isinstance(value_or_callback, int):
self._value_callback = lambda: value_or_callback
else:
self._value_callback = value_or_callback
#property
def value(self):
return self._value_callback()
def set(self, new_value):
self._value_callback = lambda: new_value
def __add__(self, other):
if isinstance(other, int):
return Integer(lambda: self.value + other)
elif isinstance(other, Integer):
return Integer(lambda: self.value + other.value)
else:
raise TypeError(other)
def __radd__(self, other):
return self.__add__(other)
def __repr__(self):
return str(self.value)
if __name__ == '__main__':
x = Integer(7)
y = x + 2
print(y)
x.set(9)
print(y)
z = x + y
y.set(10)
print(z)
Output
9
11
19

object oriented programming basics (python)

Level: Beginner
In the following code my 'samePoint' function returns False where i am expecting True. Any hints?
import math
class cPoint:
def __init__(self,x,y):
self.x = x
self.y = y
self.radius = math.sqrt(self.x*self.x + self.y*self.y)
self.angle = math.atan2(self.y,self.x)
def cartesian(self):
return (self.x, self.y)
def polar(self):
return (self.radius, self.angle)
class pPoint:
def __init__(self,r,a):
self.radius = r
self.angle = a
self.x = r * math.cos(a)
self.y = r * math.sin(a)
def cartesian(self):
return (self.x, self.y)
def polar(self):
return (self.radius, self.angle)
def samePoint(p, q):
return (p.cartesian == q.cartesian)
>>> p = cPoint(1.0000000000000002, 2.0)
>>> q = pPoint(2.23606797749979, 1.1071487177940904)
>>> p.cartesian()
(1.0000000000000002, 2.0)
>>> q.cartesian()
(1.0000000000000002, 2.0)
>>> samePoint(p, q)
False
>>>
source: MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu Introduction to Computer Science and Programming Fall 2008

Looking at your code
def samePoint(p, q):
return (p.cartesian == q.cartesian)
p.cartesian, q.cartesian are functions and you are comparing function rather than function result. Since the comparing two distinct functions, the result is False
What you should have been coding is
def samePoint(p, q):
return (p.cartesian() == q.cartesian())

You are not calling the methods on the equal check. So you are comparing the methods to each othter.
Try:
return (p.cartesian() == q.cartesian())

After you get the function calling thing fixed, you'll have floating point issues.
try,
def is_same_point(p1, p2, e):
for c1, c2 in zip(c1, c2):
if abs(c1 - c2) > e:
return False
return True
I'm really surprised that it's working out for you with the code sample you posted. You must have constructed it to do so. In general, you can't directly compare floating point values for equality.
A more pythonic way to write the above function is
def is_same_point(point1, point2, e):
return not any(abs(c1 - c2) > e for c1, c2 in zip(point1, point2))
you still have to pass the e (for epsilon) around though and that's gonna get old fast.
def make_point_tester(e):
def is_same_point(point1, point2):
return not any(abs(c1 - c2) > e for c1, c2 in zip(point1, point2))
return is_same_point
is_same_point = make_point_tester(.001)
You've allready run into functions being first class objects, so you shouldn't have any trouble with this code ;)