if __name__ == '__main__':
for i in range(5):
p = Process(target=f, args=('bob',))
p.start()
I can't understand why python can create many same object name of class.
Python doesn't declare variables like that, it creates names and then uses reference counting to account for how many names refer to an object
This works the other way too, for example a list with the names a and b can be modified via either
>>> a = []
>>> b = a
>>> b.append(1)
>>> a
[1]
As even basic types are instances of objects, you can see this reference counting at work with even a humble int
>>> import sys
>>> a = 1
>>> sys.getrefcount(1)
219
>>> b = 1
>>> sys.getrefcount(1)
220
>>> del a
>>> sys.getrefcount(1)
219
Take a look at Python has "names" from this now-ancient, but venerable article for a great description
https://david.goodger.org/projects/pycon/2007/idiomatic/handout.html#python-has-names
Related
While learning python through python docs, i came across the following wherein its explained that class variable is common to the class and that any object can change it:
Sample Code 1:
class Dog:
tricks = [] # mistaken use of a class variable
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def add_trick(self, trick):
self.tricks.append(trick)
Output:
>>> d = Dog('Fido')
>>> e = Dog('Buddy')
>>> d.add_trick('roll over')
>>> e.add_trick('play dead')
>>> d.tricks # unexpectedly shared by all dogs
['roll over', 'play dead']
Question => If so, then why doesn't y in the following example get affected when x changes its tricks attribute to 5?
Sample Code 2:
class Complex:
tricks = 3
def __init__(self,var1):
self.tricks=var1
def add_tricks(self,var1):
self.tricks=var1
x = Complex(11)
y = Complex(12)
print (x.tricks)
print (y.tricks)
x.add_tricks(5)
print (x.tricks)
print (y.tricks) -->Remains unchanged
Output:
11
12
5
12 -->Remains unchanged
And what exactly is the difference when i remove the self in the following program:
Sample Code 3:
class Complex:
tricks = 3
def __init__(self,var1):
self.tricks=var1
def add_tricks(self,var1):
tricks=var1
x = Complex(11)
y = Complex(12)
print (x.tricks)
print (y.tricks)
x.add_tricks(5) -->This change is not reflected anywhere
print (x.tricks)
print (y.tricks)
print(Complex.tricks)
Output:
11
12
11
12
3
This example may be illustrative. Given the following class (I've dropped the initialiser from your example because it doesn't let us demonstrate the behaviour):
class Complex:
tricks = 3
def add_tricks(self, value):
self.tricks = value
We can see, upon creation, the value of their tricks attribute is both 3:
>>> a = Complex()
>>> b = Complex()
>>>
>>> a.tricks
3
>>> b.tricks
3
Let's take a second and look at the names defined on those objects:
>>> a.__dict__
{}
>>> b.__dict__
{}
They're both objects with no attributes themselves. Let's see what happens after we call add_tricks on b:
>>> b.add_tricks(5)
>>>
>>> a.tricks
3
>>> b.tricks
5
Okay. So, this looks like the shared value hasn't been affected. Let's take a look at their names again:
>>> a.__dict__
{}
>>> b.__dict__
{'tricks': 5}
And there it is. Assigning to self.tricks creates an attribute local to that object with name tricks, which when accessed via the object (or self) is the one that we'll use from that point forward.
The shared value is still there and unchanged:
>>> a.__class__.tricks
3
>>> b.__class__.tricks
3
It's just on the class, not on the object.
Ok, basically what I am trying to do is to have implemented a very basic and simple B-tree, but I am finding myself with a problem: the root node holds as a child every node in the tree. I have simplified as much as possible, and here is an example of the problem that I am facing:
>>> class Btree():
subs = []
value = 0
>>> a=Btree()
>>> b=Btree()
>>> c=Btree()
>>> a.value=1
>>> b.subs.append(a)
>>> b.value=2
>>> c.subs.append(b)
>>> c.value = 3
>>> c
<__main__.variable object at 0x103d916a0>
>>> c.value
3
>>> len(c.subs)
2
>>> c.subs
[<__main__.variable object at 0x103d91780>, <__main__.variable object at 0x103d917f0>]
>>> c.subs[1].value
2
>>> c.subs[0].value
1
Can somebody tell me what is going on?
You need to use an __init__() method to make instance attributes. The way you are doing it now you are declaring class attributes that are shared by all instances of the class. Try doing this instead:
class BTree:
def __init__(self):
self.subs = []
self.value = 0
This question already has answers here:
How do I clone a list so that it doesn't change unexpectedly after assignment?
(24 answers)
Closed 15 days ago.
I come from java world where I expect following things
int a = valueassignedbyfunction();
int b = a;
a = a + 1;
after this a is 1 greater than b. But in python the b automatically gets incremented by one once the a = a + 1 operation is done because this b is referencing to the same object as a does. How can I copy only the value of a and assign it to a new object called b?
Thanks!
Assuming integers, I cannot reproduce your issue:
>>> a = 1
>>> b = a
>>> a += 1
>>> a
2
>>> b
1
If we assume objects instead:
class Test(object):
... def __init__(self, v):
... self.v = v
...
>>> a = Test(1)
>>> b = a.v
>>> a.v += 1
>>> print a.v, b
2 1
# No issues so far
# Let's copy the object instead
>>> b = a
>>> a.v += 1
>>> print a.v, b.v
3 3
# Ah, there we go
# Using user252462's suggestion
>>> from copy import deepcopy
>>> b = deepcopy(a)
>>> a.v += 1
>>> print a.v, b.v
4 3
I think the main confusion here is the following: In Java, a line like
int i = 5;
allocates memory for an integer and associates the name i with this memory location. You can somehow identify the name i with this memory location and its type and call the whole thing "the integer variable i".
In Python, the line
i = 5
evaluates the expression on the right hand side, which will yield a Python object (in this case, the expression is really simple and will yield the integer object 5). The assignment statement makes the name i point to that object, but the relation between the name and the object is a completely different one than in Java. Names are always just references to objects, and there may be many names referencing the same object or no name at all.
This documentation might help out: http://docs.python.org/library/copy.html
You can use the copy library to deepcopy objects:
import copy
b = copy.deepcopy(a)
I'm not sure what you're seeing here.
>>> a = 1
>>> b = a
>>> a = a + 1
>>> b
1
>>> a
2
>>> a is b
False
Python Integers are immutable, the + operation assigns creates a new object with value a+1. There are some weird reference issues with integers (http://distilledb.com/blog/archives/date/2009/06/18/python-gotcha-integer-equality.page), but you should get the same thing you expected in Java
How about just doing
a = 1
b = a*1
Is there a way to assign references in python?
For example, in php i can do this:
$a = 10;
$b = &$a;
$a = 20;
echo $a." ".$b; // 20, 20
how can i do same thing in python?
In python, if you're doing this with non-primitive types, it acts exactly like you want: assigning is done using references. That's why, when you run the following:
>>> a = {'key' : 'value'}
>>> b = a
>>> b['key'] = 'new-value'
>>> print a['key']
you get 'new-value'.
Strictly saying, if you do the following:
>>> a = 5
>>> b = a
>>> print id(a) == id(b)
you'll get True.
But! Because of primitive types are immutable, you cant change the value of variable b itself. You are just able create a new variable with a new value, based on b. For example, if you do the following:
>>> print id(b)
>>> b = b + 1
>>> print id(b)
you'll get two different values.
This means that Python created a new variable, computed its value basing on b's value and then gave this new variable the name b. This concerns all of the immutable types. Connecting two previous examples together:
>>> a = 5
>>> b = a
>>> print id(a)==id(b)
True
>>> b += 1
>>> print id(b)==id(a)
False
So, when you assign in Python, you always assign reference. But some types cannot be changed, so when you do some changes, you actually create a new variable with another reference.
In Python, everything is by default a reference. So when you do something like:
x=[1,2,3]
y=x
x[1]=-1
print y
It prints [1,-1,3].
The reason this does not work when you do
x=1
y=x
x=-1
print y
is that ints are immutable. They cannot be changed. Think about it, does a number really ever change? When you assign a new value to x, you are assigning a new value - not changing the old one. So y still points to the old one. Other immutable types (e.g. strings and tuples) behave in the same way.
... the is keyword that can be used for equality in strings.
>>> s = 'str'
>>> s is 'str'
True
>>> s is 'st'
False
I tried both __is__() and __eq__() but they didn't work.
>>> class MyString:
... def __init__(self):
... self.s = 'string'
... def __is__(self, s):
... return self.s == s
...
>>>
>>>
>>> m = MyString()
>>> m is 'ss'
False
>>> m is 'string' # <--- Expected to work
False
>>>
>>> class MyString:
... def __init__(self):
... self.s = 'string'
... def __eq__(self, s):
... return self.s == s
...
>>>
>>> m = MyString()
>>> m is 'ss'
False
>>> m is 'string' # <--- Expected to work, but again failed
False
>>>
Testing strings with is only works when the strings are interned. Unless you really know what you're doing and explicitly interned the strings you should never use is on strings.
is tests for identity, not equality. That means Python simply compares the memory address a object resides in. is basically answers the question "Do I have two names for the same object?" - overloading that would make no sense.
For example, ("a" * 100) is ("a" * 100) is False. Usually Python writes each string into a different memory location, interning mostly happens for string literals.
The is operator is equivalent to comparing id(x) values. For example:
>>> s1 = 'str'
>>> s2 = 'str'
>>> s1 is s2
True
>>> id(s1)
4564468760
>>> id(s2)
4564468760
>>> id(s1) == id(s2) # equivalent to `s1 is s2`
True
id is currently implemented to use pointers as the comparison. So you can't overload is itself, and AFAIK you can't overload id either.
So, you can't. Unusual in python, but there it is.
The Python is keyword tests object identity. You should NOT use it to test for string equality. It may seem to work frequently because Python implementations, like those of many very high level languages, performs "interning" of strings. That is to say that string literals and values are internally kept in a hashed list and those which are identical are rendered as references to the same object. (This is possible because Python strings are immutable).
However, as with any implementation detail, you should not rely on this. If you want to test for equality use the == operator. If you truly want to test for object identity then use is --- and I'd be hard-pressed to come up with a case where you should care about string object identity. Unfortunately you can't count on whether two strings are somehow "intentionally" identical object references because of the aforementioned interning.
The is keyword compares objects (or, rather, compares if two references are to the same object).
Which is, I think, why there's no mechanism to provide your own implementation.
It happens to work sometimes on strings because Python stores strings 'cleverly', such that when you create two identical strings they are stored in one object.
>>> a = "string"
>>> b = "string"
>>> a is b
True
>>> c = "str"+"ing"
>>> a is c
True
You can hopefully see the reference vs data comparison in a simple 'copy' example:
>>> a = {"a":1}
>>> b = a
>>> c = a.copy()
>>> a is b
True
>>> a is c
False
If you are not afraid of messing up with bytecode, you can intercept and patch COMPARE_OP with 8 ("is") argument to call your hook function on objects being compared. Look at dis module documentation for start-in.
And don't forget to intercept __builtin__.id() too if someone will do id(a) == id(b) instead of a is b.
'is' compares object identity whereas == compares values.
Example:
a=[1,2]
b=[1,2]
#a==b returns True
#a is b returns False
p=q=[1,2]
#p==q returns True
#p is q returns True
is fails to compare a string variable to string value and two string variables when the string starts with '-'. My Python version is 2.6.6
>>> s = '-hi'
>>> s is '-hi'
False
>>> s = '-hi'
>>> k = '-hi'
>>> s is k
False
>>> '-hi' is '-hi'
True
You can't overload the is operator. What you want to overload is the == operator. This can be done by defining a __eq__ method in the class.
You are using identity comparison. == is probably what you want. The exception to this is when you want to be checking if one item and another are the EXACT same object and in the same memory position. In your examples, the item's aren't the same, since one is of a different type (my_string) than the other (string). Also, there's no such thing as someclass.__is__ in python (unless, of course, you put it there yourself). If there was, comparing objects with is wouldn't be reliable to simply compare the memory locations.
When I first encountered the is keyword, it confused me as well. I would have thought that is and == were no different. They produced the same output from the interpreter on many objects. This type of assumption is actually EXACTLY what is... is for. It's the python equivalent "Hey, don't mistake these two objects. they're different.", which is essentially what [whoever it was that straightened me out] said. Worded much differently, but one point == the other point.
the
for some helpful examples and some text to help with the sometimes confusing differences
visit a document from python.org's mail host written by "Danny Yoo"
or, if that's offline, use the unlisted pastebin I made of it's body.
in case they, in some 20 or so blue moons (blue moons are a real event), are both down, I'll quote the code examples
###
>>> my_name = "danny"
>>> your_name = "ian"
>>> my_name == your_name
0 #or False
###
###
>>> my_name[1:3] == your_name[1:3]
1 #or True
###
###
>>> my_name[1:3] is your_name[1:3]
0
###
Assertion Errors can easily arise with is keyword while comparing objects. For example, objects a and b might hold same value and share same memory address. Therefore, doing an
>>> a == b
is going to evaluate to
True
But if
>>> a is b
evaluates to
False
you should probably check
>>> type(a)
and
>>> type(b)
These might be different and a reason for failure.
Because string interning, this could look strange:
a = 'hello'
'hello' is a #True
b= 'hel-lo'
'hel-lo' is b #False