We Keep Coding

Python setter and getter for class attributes [duplicate]

I have a class with two class methods (using the classmethod() function) for getting and setting what is essentially a static variable. I tried to use the property() function with these, but it results in an error. I was able to reproduce the error with the following in the interpreter:
class Foo(object):
_var = 5
#classmethod
def getvar(cls):
return cls._var
#classmethod
def setvar(cls, value):
cls._var = value
var = property(getvar, setvar)
I can demonstrate the class methods, but they don't work as properties:
>>> f = Foo()
>>> f.getvar()
5
>>> f.setvar(4)
>>> f.getvar()
4
>>> f.var
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
TypeError: 'classmethod' object is not callable
>>> f.var=5
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in ?
TypeError: 'classmethod' object is not callable
Is it possible to use the property() function with #classmethod decorated functions?

3.8 < Python < 3.11
Can use both decorators together. See this answer.
Python < 3.9
A property is created on a class but affects an instance. So if you want a classmethod property, create the property on the metaclass.
>>> class foo(object):
... _var = 5
... class __metaclass__(type): # Python 2 syntax for metaclasses
... pass
... #classmethod
... def getvar(cls):
... return cls._var
... #classmethod
... def setvar(cls, value):
... cls._var = value
...
>>> foo.__metaclass__.var = property(foo.getvar.im_func, foo.setvar.im_func)
>>> foo.var
5
>>> foo.var = 3
>>> foo.var
3
But since you're using a metaclass anyway, it will read better if you just move the classmethods in there.
>>> class foo(object):
... _var = 5
... class __metaclass__(type): # Python 2 syntax for metaclasses
... #property
... def var(cls):
... return cls._var
... #var.setter
... def var(cls, value):
... cls._var = value
...
>>> foo.var
5
>>> foo.var = 3
>>> foo.var
3
or, using Python 3's metaclass=... syntax, and the metaclass defined outside of the foo class body, and the metaclass responsible for setting the initial value of _var:
>>> class foo_meta(type):
... def __init__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
... cls._var = 5
... #property
... def var(cls):
... return cls._var
... #var.setter
... def var(cls, value):
... cls._var = value
...
>>> class foo(metaclass=foo_meta):
... pass
...
>>> foo.var
5
>>> foo.var = 3
>>> foo.var
3

In Python 3.9 You could use them together, but (as noted in #xgt's comment) it was deprecated in Python 3.11, so it is not recommended to use it.
Check the version remarks here:
https://docs.python.org/3.11/library/functions.html#classmethod
However, it used to work like so:
class G:
#classmethod
#property
def __doc__(cls):
return f'A doc for {cls.__name__!r}'
Order matters - due to how the descriptors interact, #classmethod has to be on top.

I hope this dead-simple read-only #classproperty decorator would help somebody looking for classproperties.
class classproperty(property):
def __get__(self, owner_self, owner_cls):
return self.fget(owner_cls)
class C(object):
#classproperty
def x(cls):
return 1
assert C.x == 1
assert C().x == 1

Reading the Python 2.2 release notes, I find the following.
The get method [of a property] won't be called when
the property is accessed as a class
attribute (C.x) instead of as an
instance attribute (C().x). If you
want to override the __get__ operation
for properties when used as a class
attribute, you can subclass property -
it is a new-style type itself - to
extend its __get__ method, or you can
define a descriptor type from scratch
by creating a new-style class that
defines __get__, __set__ and
__delete__ methods.
NOTE: The below method doesn't actually work for setters, only getters.
Therefore, I believe the prescribed solution is to create a ClassProperty as a subclass of property.
class ClassProperty(property):
def __get__(self, cls, owner):
return self.fget.__get__(None, owner)()
class foo(object):
_var=5
def getvar(cls):
return cls._var
getvar=classmethod(getvar)
def setvar(cls,value):
cls._var=value
setvar=classmethod(setvar)
var=ClassProperty(getvar,setvar)
assert foo.getvar() == 5
foo.setvar(4)
assert foo.getvar() == 4
assert foo.var == 4
foo.var = 3
assert foo.var == 3
However, the setters don't actually work:
foo.var = 4
assert foo.var == foo._var # raises AssertionError
foo._var is unchanged, you've simply overwritten the property with a new value.
You can also use ClassProperty as a decorator:
class foo(object):
_var = 5
#ClassProperty
#classmethod
def var(cls):
return cls._var
#var.setter
#classmethod
def var(cls, value):
cls._var = value
assert foo.var == 5

Is it possible to use the property() function with classmethod decorated functions?
No.
However, a classmethod is simply a bound method (a partial function) on a class accessible from instances of that class.
Since the instance is a function of the class and you can derive the class from the instance, you can can get whatever desired behavior you might want from a class-property with property:
class Example(object):
_class_property = None
#property
def class_property(self):
return self._class_property
#class_property.setter
def class_property(self, value):
type(self)._class_property = value
#class_property.deleter
def class_property(self):
del type(self)._class_property
This code can be used to test - it should pass without raising any errors:
ex1 = Example()
ex2 = Example()
ex1.class_property = None
ex2.class_property = 'Example'
assert ex1.class_property is ex2.class_property
del ex2.class_property
assert not hasattr(ex1, 'class_property')
And note that we didn't need metaclasses at all - and you don't directly access a metaclass through its classes' instances anyways.
writing a #classproperty decorator
You can actually create a classproperty decorator in just a few lines of code by subclassing property (it's implemented in C, but you can see equivalent Python here):
class classproperty(property):
def __get__(self, obj, objtype=None):
return super(classproperty, self).__get__(objtype)
def __set__(self, obj, value):
super(classproperty, self).__set__(type(obj), value)
def __delete__(self, obj):
super(classproperty, self).__delete__(type(obj))
Then treat the decorator as if it were a classmethod combined with property:
class Foo(object):
_bar = 5
#classproperty
def bar(cls):
"""this is the bar attribute - each subclass of Foo gets its own.
Lookups should follow the method resolution order.
"""
return cls._bar
#bar.setter
def bar(cls, value):
cls._bar = value
#bar.deleter
def bar(cls):
del cls._bar
And this code should work without errors:
def main():
f = Foo()
print(f.bar)
f.bar = 4
print(f.bar)
del f.bar
try:
f.bar
except AttributeError:
pass
else:
raise RuntimeError('f.bar must have worked - inconceivable!')
help(f) # includes the Foo.bar help.
f.bar = 5
class Bar(Foo):
"a subclass of Foo, nothing more"
help(Bar) # includes the Foo.bar help!
b = Bar()
b.bar = 'baz'
print(b.bar) # prints baz
del b.bar
print(b.bar) # prints 5 - looked up from Foo!
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
But I'm not sure how well-advised this would be. An old mailing list article suggests it shouldn't work.
Getting the property to work on the class:
The downside of the above is that the "class property" isn't accessible from the class, because it would simply overwrite the data descriptor from the class __dict__.
However, we can override this with a property defined in the metaclass __dict__. For example:
class MetaWithFooClassProperty(type):
#property
def foo(cls):
"""The foo property is a function of the class -
in this case, the trivial case of the identity function.
"""
return cls
And then a class instance of the metaclass could have a property that accesses the class's property using the principle already demonstrated in the prior sections:
class FooClassProperty(metaclass=MetaWithFooClassProperty):
#property
def foo(self):
"""access the class's property"""
return type(self).foo
And now we see both the instance
>>> FooClassProperty().foo
<class '__main__.FooClassProperty'>
and the class
>>> FooClassProperty.foo
<class '__main__.FooClassProperty'>
have access to the class property.

Python 3!
See #Amit Portnoy's answer for an even cleaner method in python >= 3.9
Old question, lots of views, sorely in need of a one-true Python 3 way.
Luckily, it's easy with the metaclass kwarg:
class FooProperties(type):
#property
def var(cls):
return cls._var
class Foo(object, metaclass=FooProperties):
_var = 'FOO!'
Then, >>> Foo.var
'FOO!'

There is no reasonable way to make this "class property" system to work in Python.
Here is one unreasonable way to make it work. You can certainly make it more seamless with increasing amounts of metaclass magic.
class ClassProperty(object):
def __init__(self, getter, setter):
self.getter = getter
self.setter = setter
def __get__(self, cls, owner):
return getattr(cls, self.getter)()
def __set__(self, cls, value):
getattr(cls, self.setter)(value)
class MetaFoo(type):
var = ClassProperty('getvar', 'setvar')
class Foo(object):
__metaclass__ = MetaFoo
_var = 5
#classmethod
def getvar(cls):
print "Getting var =", cls._var
return cls._var
#classmethod
def setvar(cls, value):
print "Setting var =", value
cls._var = value
x = Foo.var
print "Foo.var = ", x
Foo.var = 42
x = Foo.var
print "Foo.var = ", x
The knot of the issue is that properties are what Python calls "descriptors". There is no short and easy way to explain how this sort of metaprogramming works, so I must point you to the descriptor howto.
You only ever need to understand this sort of things if you are implementing a fairly advanced framework. Like a transparent object persistence or RPC system, or a kind of domain-specific language.
However, in a comment to a previous answer, you say that you
need to modify an attribute that in such a way that is seen by all instances of a class, and in the scope from which these class methods are called does not have references to all instances of the class.
It seems to me, what you really want is an Observer design pattern.

Setting it only on the meta class doesn't help if you want to access the class property via an instantiated object, in this case you need to install a normal property on the object as well (which dispatches to the class property). I think the following is a bit more clear:
#!/usr/bin/python
class classproperty(property):
def __get__(self, obj, type_):
return self.fget.__get__(None, type_)()
def __set__(self, obj, value):
cls = type(obj)
return self.fset.__get__(None, cls)(value)
class A (object):
_foo = 1
#classproperty
#classmethod
def foo(cls):
return cls._foo
#foo.setter
#classmethod
def foo(cls, value):
cls.foo = value
a = A()
print a.foo
b = A()
print b.foo
b.foo = 5
print a.foo
A.foo = 10
print b.foo
print A.foo

Half a solution, __set__ on the class does not work, still. The solution is a custom property class implementing both a property and a staticmethod
class ClassProperty(object):
def __init__(self, fget, fset):
self.fget = fget
self.fset = fset
def __get__(self, instance, owner):
return self.fget()
def __set__(self, instance, value):
self.fset(value)
class Foo(object):
_bar = 1
def get_bar():
print 'getting'
return Foo._bar
def set_bar(value):
print 'setting'
Foo._bar = value
bar = ClassProperty(get_bar, set_bar)
f = Foo()
#__get__ works
f.bar
Foo.bar
f.bar = 2
Foo.bar = 3 #__set__ does not

Because I need to modify an attribute that in such a way that is seen by all instances of a class, and in the scope from which these class methods are called does not have references to all instances of the class.
Do you have access to at least one instance of the class? I can think of a way to do it then:
class MyClass (object):
__var = None
def _set_var (self, value):
type (self).__var = value
def _get_var (self):
return self.__var
var = property (_get_var, _set_var)
a = MyClass ()
b = MyClass ()
a.var = "foo"
print b.var

Give this a try, it gets the job done without having to change/add a lot of existing code.
>>> class foo(object):
... _var = 5
... def getvar(cls):
... return cls._var
... getvar = classmethod(getvar)
... def setvar(cls, value):
... cls._var = value
... setvar = classmethod(setvar)
... var = property(lambda self: self.getvar(), lambda self, val: self.setvar(val))
...
>>> f = foo()
>>> f.var
5
>>> f.var = 3
>>> f.var
3
The property function needs two callable arguments. give them lambda wrappers (which it passes the instance as its first argument) and all is well.

Here's a solution which should work for both access via the class and access via an instance which uses a metaclass.
In [1]: class ClassPropertyMeta(type):
...: #property
...: def prop(cls):
...: return cls._prop
...: def __new__(cls, name, parents, dct):
...: # This makes overriding __getattr__ and __setattr__ in the class impossible, but should be fixable
...: dct['__getattr__'] = classmethod(lambda cls, attr: getattr(cls, attr))
...: dct['__setattr__'] = classmethod(lambda cls, attr, val: setattr(cls, attr, val))
...: return super(ClassPropertyMeta, cls).__new__(cls, name, parents, dct)
...:
In [2]: class ClassProperty(object):
...: __metaclass__ = ClassPropertyMeta
...: _prop = 42
...: def __getattr__(self, attr):
...: raise Exception('Never gets called')
...:
In [3]: ClassProperty.prop
Out[3]: 42
In [4]: ClassProperty.prop = 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AttributeError Traceback (most recent call last)
<ipython-input-4-e2e8b423818a> in <module>()
----> 1 ClassProperty.prop = 1
AttributeError: can't set attribute
In [5]: cp = ClassProperty()
In [6]: cp.prop
Out[6]: 42
In [7]: cp.prop = 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AttributeError Traceback (most recent call last)
<ipython-input-7-e8284a3ee950> in <module>()
----> 1 cp.prop = 1
<ipython-input-1-16b7c320d521> in <lambda>(cls, attr, val)
6 # This makes overriding __getattr__ and __setattr__ in the class impossible, but should be fixable
7 dct['__getattr__'] = classmethod(lambda cls, attr: getattr(cls, attr))
----> 8 dct['__setattr__'] = classmethod(lambda cls, attr, val: setattr(cls, attr, val))
9 return super(ClassPropertyMeta, cls).__new__(cls, name, parents, dct)
AttributeError: can't set attribute
This also works with a setter defined in the metaclass.

I found one clean solution to this problem. It's a package called classutilities (pip install classutilities), see the documentation here on PyPi.
Consider example:
import classutilities
class SomeClass(classutilities.ClassPropertiesMixin):
_some_variable = 8 # Some encapsulated class variable
#classutilities.classproperty
def some_variable(cls): # class property getter
return cls._some_variable
#some_variable.setter
def some_variable(cls, value): # class property setter
cls._some_variable = value
You can use it on both class level and instance level:
# Getter on class level:
value = SomeClass.some_variable
print(value) # >>> 8
# Getter on instance level
inst = SomeClass()
value = inst.some_variable
print(value) # >>> 8
# Setter on class level:
new_value = 9
SomeClass.some_variable = new_value
print(SomeClass.some_variable) # >>> 9
print(SomeClass._some_variable) # >>> 9
# Setter on instance level
inst = SomeClass()
inst.some_variable = new_value
print(SomeClass.some_variable) # >>> 9
print(SomeClass._some_variable) # >>> 9
print(inst.some_variable) # >>> 9
print(inst._some_variable) # >>> 9
As you can see, it works correctly under all circumstances.

Based on https://stackoverflow.com/a/1800999/2290820
class MetaProperty(type):
def __init__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
super()
#property
def praparty(cls):
return cls._var
#praparty.setter
def praparty(cls, val):
cls._var = val
class A(metaclass=MetaProperty):
_var = 5
print(A.praparty)
A.praparty = 6
print(A.praparty)

For a functional approach pre Python 3.9 you can use this:
def classproperty(fget):
return type(
'classproperty',
(),
{'__get__': lambda self, _, cls: fget(cls), '__module__': None}
)()
class Item:
a = 47
#classproperty
def x(cls):
return cls.a
Item.x

After searching different places, I found a method to define a classproperty
valid with Python 2 and 3.
from future.utils import with_metaclass
class BuilderMetaClass(type):
#property
def load_namespaces(self):
return (self.__sourcepath__)
class BuilderMixin(with_metaclass(BuilderMetaClass, object)):
__sourcepath__ = 'sp'
print(BuilderMixin.load_namespaces)
Hope this can help somebody :)

A code completion friendly solution for Python < 3.9
from typing import (
Callable,
Generic,
TypeVar,
)
T = TypeVar('T')
class classproperty(Generic[T]):
"""Converts a method to a class property.
"""
def __init__(self, f: Callable[..., T]):
self.fget = f
def __get__(self, instance, owner) -> T:
return self.fget(owner)

Here is my solution that also caches the class property
class class_property(object):
# this caches the result of the function call for fn with cls input
# use this as a decorator on function methods that you want converted
# into cached properties
def __init__(self, fn):
self._fn_name = fn.__name__
if not isinstance(fn, (classmethod, staticmethod)):
fn = classmethod(fn)
self._fn = fn
def __get__(self, obj, cls=None):
if cls is None:
cls = type(obj)
if (
self._fn_name in vars(cls) and
type(vars(cls)[self._fn_name]).__name__ != "class_property"
):
return vars(cls)[self._fn_name]
else:
value = self._fn.__get__(obj, cls)()
setattr(cls, self._fn_name, value)
return value

Here's my suggestion. Don't use class methods.
Seriously.
What's the reason for using class methods in this case? Why not have an ordinary object of an ordinary class?
If you simply want to change the value, a property isn't really very helpful is it? Just set the attribute value and be done with it.
A property should only be used if there's something to conceal -- something that might change in a future implementation.
Maybe your example is way stripped down, and there is some hellish calculation you've left off. But it doesn't look like the property adds significant value.
The Java-influenced "privacy" techniques (in Python, attribute names that begin with _) aren't really very helpful. Private from whom? The point of private is a little nebulous when you have the source (as you do in Python.)
The Java-influenced EJB-style getters and setters (often done as properties in Python) are there to facilitate Java's primitive introspection as well as to pass muster with the static language compiler. All those getters and setters aren't as helpful in Python.

Calling variable inside self parameter in class method

I wonder if we can call variable initiated in self in class method. For example:
class ABC():
def method1(self):
self.var1 = '123'
#classmethod
def callvar1(cls):
'''print var1'''
I want to achieve the same output like this:
class ABC():
var1 = '123'
def method1(self):
self.var1 = '123'
#classmethod
def callvar1(cls):
print(cls.var1)
How can I access self.var1 in callvar1?

Since callvar1 is a class method, it does not have access to self. This is because the method is not tied to a specific instance of the class, but rather to the class itself. Therefore, when you call the method, it does not know which instance you are referring to. As you did in the second block of the code, you must pass the object whose var1 you would like to print to the function.
Your other option would be to not make it a class method.

Class methods are bound to the class itself rather than a particular instance of it so if you're trying to access self.var1 (an instance variable) inside the class method you're not going to have much fun.
Your best option is to simply make the method not a class method (depending on your use case):
>>> class ABC():
... var1 = '123'
... def method1(self):
... self.var1 = '123'
... def callvar1(self):
... print(self.var1)
...
>>> b = ABC()
>>> b.callvar1()
123
Although another option is to pass an instance of the class to the class method:
>>> class ABC():
... var1 = '123'
... def method1(self):
... self.var1 = '123'
... #classmethod
... def callvar1(cls, inst):
... print(inst.var1)
...
>>> b = ABC()
>>> ABC.callvar1(b)
123

Use the self keyword to access members of the class.
class ABC():
var1 = '123'
def method1(self):
self.var1 = '123'
#classmethod
def callvar1(self):
print(self.var1)

How to call class method within namespace of the same class in python 3.x

When working with python instances, it is possible to access bound methods of the same class using self. This resolves to a method corresponding to the same class in hierarchy.
class A:
def f(self):
return 1
def __init__(self):
self.v = self.f()
class B(A):
def f(self):
return 2
b = B()
# b.v is set to 2
But, when working with class methods, there is no apparent way of accessing methods of the same class as above.
In my use case, f above needs to be a class method and I need to set class variable v according to f corresponding to the same class. Somewhat like:
class A:
#classmethod
def f(cls):
return 1
v = resolution_of_calling_class.f()
class B(A):
#classmethod
def f(cls):
return 2
# B.v should be 2
edit: v is actually an attribute defined by parent class, which should find a method overridden by child class

You just need to override __new__ method, since it is invoked before the __init__ and its purpose is to create an instance, that will be initialized by __init__.
class A:
def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
cls.v = cls.f()
return super().__new__(cls, *args, **kwargs)
#classmethod
def f(cls):
return 1
class B(A):
#classmethod
def f(cls):
return 2
a = A()
print(a.v)
b = B()
print(b.v)
1
2

I am not 100% sure I understand what you are trying to do.
I used your code above and
class A:
#classmethod
def f(cls):
return 1
class B:
#classmethod
def f(cls):
return 2
print(B.f())
gives me 2 just as I expected it would. Should B be a child class of A as in the first example?

Automatically apply getter and setter to new object variable

Ok, lets say I have a really simple class i.e.:
class Test(object):
pass
What I would like to do is to define some default setter and getter methods
which are automatically applied to a new object member at creation time. In the example below a.x should always be uppercase, i.e.:
a = Test()
a.x = "foo"
print a.x
>>> FOO
If I create x within the class I would get this behavior like this:
class Test(object):
def __init__(self):
self._x = ""
#property
def x(self):
return self._x
#x.setter(self, string):
self._x = string.upper()
So is there any possibility to do this without defining setter and getter methods for each member ?? Thank a lot.
EDIT: With creation time I meant the creation time of a.x not of the class instance.

The simplest way is probably to override __setattr__, and change any string values to uppercase:
>>> class Test(object):
def __setattr__(self, attr, val):
if isinstance(val, basestring):
val = val.upper()
super(Test, self).__setattr__(attr, val)
>>> t = Test()
>>> t.x = 'foo'
>>> t.x
'FOO'

Subclass a dict;
In [1]: %cpaste
Pasting code; enter '--' alone on the line to stop or use Ctrl-D.
:class Struct(dict):
: """A dict subclass where you can simply use a dot to access attributes."""
:
: def __getattr__(self, name):
: return self[name]
:
: def __setattr__(self, name, value):
: self[name] = value
:--
In [2]: a = Struct()
In [3]: a.x = "foo"
In [4]: a.x
Out[4]: 'foo'
In [5]: a.length = 14
In [6]: a
Out[6]: {'length': 14, 'x': 'foo'}

That sounds like a use-case for pythons Descriptor Proctocol.
class WithDescriptors:
x = UpperCaseDescriptor()
y = UpperCaseDescriptor()
z = UpperCaseDescriptor()
class UperCaseDescriptor(object):
def __init__(self):
self.val = ''
def __get__(self, obj, objtype):
return self.val.upper()
def __set__(self, obj, val):
self.val = val
Thats just an outline and i didnt test the code to work!
If you want to extend such behaviour to every attribute of an instance,
even which are not existent, you should consider metaclasses.

Using #property decorator on dicts

I'm trying to use Python's #property decorator on a dict in a class. The idea is that I want a certain value (call it 'message') to be cleared after it is accessed. But I also want another value (call it 'last_message') to contain the last set message, and keep it until another message is set. In my mind, this code would work:
>>> class A(object):
... def __init__(self):
... self._b = {"message": "",
... "last_message": ""}
... #property
... def b(self):
... b = self._b
... self._b["message"] = ""
... return b
... #b.setter
... def b(self, value):
... self._b = value
... self._b["last_message"] = value["message"]
...
>>>
However, it doesn't seem to:
>>> a = A()
>>> a.b["message"] = "hello"
>>> a.b["message"]
''
>>> a.b["last_message"]
''
>>>
I'm not sure what I have done wrong? It seems to me like #property doesn't work like I would expect it to on dicts, but maybe I'm doing something else fundamentally wrong?
Also, I know that I could just use individual values in the class. But this is implemented as a session in a web application and I need it to be a dict. I could either make this work, or make the whole session object to pretend it's a dict, or use individual variables and hack it into workingness throughout the rest of the code base. I would much rather just get this to work.

class MyDict(dict):
def __setitem__(self, key, value):
if key == 'message':
super().__setitem__('message', '')
super().__setitem__('last_message', value)
else:
super().__setitem__(key, value)
class A(object):
def __init__(self):
self._b = MyDict({"message": "",
"last_message": ""})
#property
def b(self):
return self._b
a = A()
a.b['message'] = 'hello'
print(a.b['message'])
# ''
print(a.b['last_message'])
# hello
As I think you've discovered, the reason why your setter wasn't working is because
a.b['message']='hello'
first accesses a.b, which calls the b property's getter, not its setter. The getter returns the dict self._b. Then self._b['message']='hello' causes the dict's __setitem__ is called .
So to fix the problem, you need a special dict (like MyDict).

I may be missing what you are trying to do here, but does this solve your problem?
class A(object):
def __init__(self):
self._b = {'message':'',
'last_message': ''}
#property
def b(self):
b = self._b.copy()
self._b['message'] = ''
return b
#b.setter
def b(self, value):
self._b['message'] = value
self._b['last_message'] = value
if __name__ == "__main__":
a = A()
a.b = "hello"
print a.b
print a.b
print a.b["last_message"]
$ python dictPropTest.py
{'last_message': 'hello', 'message': 'hello'}
{'last_message': 'hello', 'message': ''}
hello