Develop Reference

How to use python's getattr feature on a method of a class? [duplicate]

If I have a class ...
class MyClass:
def method(arg):
print(arg)
... which I use to create an object ...
my_object = MyClass()
... on which I call method("foo") like so ...
>>> my_object.method("foo")
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: method() takes exactly 1 positional argument (2 given)
... why does Python tell me I gave it two arguments, when I only gave one?

In Python, this:
my_object.method("foo")
... is syntactic sugar, which the interpreter translates behind the scenes into:
MyClass.method(my_object, "foo")
... which, as you can see, does indeed have two arguments - it's just that the first one is implicit, from the point of view of the caller.
This is because most methods do some work with the object they're called on, so there needs to be some way for that object to be referred to inside the method. By convention, this first argument is called self inside the method definition:
class MyNewClass:
def method(self, arg):
print(self)
print(arg)
If you call method("foo") on an instance of MyNewClass, it works as expected:
>>> my_new_object = MyNewClass()
>>> my_new_object.method("foo")
<__main__.MyNewClass object at 0x29045d0>
foo
Occasionally (but not often), you really don't care about the object that your method is bound to, and in that circumstance, you can decorate the method with the builtin staticmethod() function to say so:
class MyOtherClass:
#staticmethod
def method(arg):
print(arg)
... in which case you don't need to add a self argument to the method definition, and it still works:
>>> my_other_object = MyOtherClass()
>>> my_other_object.method("foo")
foo

In simple words
In Python you should add self as the first parameter to all defined methods in classes:
class MyClass:
def method(self, arg):
print(arg)
Then you can use your method according to your intuition:
>>> my_object = MyClass()
>>> my_object.method("foo")
foo
For a better understanding, you can also read the answers to this question: What is the purpose of self?

Something else to consider when this type of error is encountered:
I was running into this error message and found this post helpful. Turns out in my case I had overridden an __init__() where there was object inheritance.
The inherited example is rather long, so I'll skip to a more simple example that doesn't use inheritance:
class MyBadInitClass:
def ___init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def name_foo(self, arg):
print(self)
print(arg)
print("My name is", self.name)
class MyNewClass:
def new_foo(self, arg):
print(self)
print(arg)
my_new_object = MyNewClass()
my_new_object.new_foo("NewFoo")
my_bad_init_object = MyBadInitClass(name="Test Name")
my_bad_init_object.name_foo("name foo")
Result is:
<__main__.MyNewClass object at 0x033C48D0>
NewFoo
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:/Users/Orange/PycharmProjects/Chapter9/bad_init_example.py", line 41, in <module>
my_bad_init_object = MyBadInitClass(name="Test Name")
TypeError: object() takes no parameters
PyCharm didn't catch this typo. Nor did Notepad++ (other editors/IDE's might).
Granted, this is a "takes no parameters" TypeError, it isn't much different than "got two" when expecting one, in terms of object initialization in Python.
Addressing the topic: An overloading initializer will be used if syntactically correct, but if not it will be ignored and the built-in used instead. The object won't expect/handle this and the error is thrown.
In the case of the sytax error: The fix is simple, just edit the custom init statement:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name

Newcomer to Python, I had this issue when I was using the Python's ** feature in a wrong way. Trying to call this definition from somewhere:
def create_properties_frame(self, parent, **kwargs):
using a call without a double star was causing the problem:
self.create_properties_frame(frame, kw_gsp)
TypeError: create_properties_frame() takes 2 positional arguments but 3 were given
The solution is to add ** to the argument:
self.create_properties_frame(frame, **kw_gsp)

As mentioned in other answers - when you use an instance method you need to pass self as the first argument - this is the source of the error.
With addition to that,it is important to understand that only instance methods take self as the first argument in order to refer to the instance.
In case the method is Static you don't pass self, but a cls argument instead (or class_).
Please see an example below.
class City:
country = "USA" # This is a class level attribute which will be shared across all instances (and not created PER instance)
def __init__(self, name, location, population):
self.name = name
self.location = location
self.population = population
# This is an instance method which takes self as the first argument to refer to the instance
def print_population(self, some_nice_sentence_prefix):
print(some_nice_sentence_prefix +" In " +self.name + " lives " +self.population + " people!")
# This is a static (class) method which is marked with the #classmethod attribute
# All class methods must take a class argument as first param. The convention is to name is "cls" but class_ is also ok
#classmethod
def change_country(cls, new_country):
cls.country = new_country
Some tests just to make things more clear:
# Populate objects
city1 = City("New York", "East", "18,804,000")
city2 = City("Los Angeles", "West", "10,118,800")
#1) Use the instance method: No need to pass "self" - it is passed as the city1 instance
city1.print_population("Did You Know?") # Prints: Did You Know? In New York lives 18,804,000 people!
#2.A) Use the static method in the object
city2.change_country("Canada")
#2.B) Will be reflected in all objects
print("city1.country=",city1.country) # Prints Canada
print("city2.country=",city2.country) # Prints Canada

It occurs when you don't specify the no of parameters the __init__() or any other method looking for.
For example:
class Dog:
def __init__(self):
print("IN INIT METHOD")
def __unicode__(self,):
print("IN UNICODE METHOD")
def __str__(self):
print("IN STR METHOD")
obj = Dog("JIMMY", 1, 2, 3, "WOOF")
When you run the above programme, it gives you an error like that:
TypeError: __init__() takes 1 positional argument but 6 were given
How we can get rid of this thing?
Just pass the parameters, what __init__() method looking for
class Dog:
def __init__(self, dogname, dob_d, dob_m, dob_y, dogSpeakText):
self.name_of_dog = dogname
self.date_of_birth = dob_d
self.month_of_birth = dob_m
self.year_of_birth = dob_y
self.sound_it_make = dogSpeakText
def __unicode__(self, ):
print("IN UNICODE METHOD")
def __str__(self):
print("IN STR METHOD")
obj = Dog("JIMMY", 1, 2, 3, "WOOF")
print(id(obj))

If you want to call method without creating object, you can change method to static method.
class MyClass:
#staticmethod
def method(arg):
print(arg)
MyClass.method("i am a static method")

I get this error when I'm sleep-deprived, and create a class using def instead of class:
def MyClass():
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
a = MyClass(3)
-> TypeError: MyClass() takes 0 positional arguments but 1 was given

You should actually create a class:
class accum:
def __init__(self):
self.acc = 0
def accumulator(self, var2add, end):
if not end:
self.acc+=var2add
return self.acc

In my case, I forgot to add the ()
I was calling the method like this
obj = className.myMethod
But it should be is like this
obj = className.myMethod()

How to print signature of child class when parent class has __call__ defined

I have the following code
class Type:
def __init__(self,name):
self.name = name
def __call__(self):
if self.name=="Imaginary":
print(f"{self.real} + {self.img}i")
if self.name == "Integer":
print("integer = {self.num}")
class IntegerType(Type):
def __init__(self,num):
super().__init__("Integer")
self.num = num
class ImaginaryType(Type):
def __init__(self, real, img):
super().__init__("Imaginary")
self.real = real
self.img = img
b = ImaginaryType(2,3)
b()
output : 2 + 3i
for the above b object if i use inspect.signature to check the signature of the class i see the following.
In [30]: from inspect import signature
In [31]: signature(b)
Out[31]: <Signature ()>
After going through the code of inspect.signature, I understand that it looks if __call__ has been overrided in a base class. If so, it prints that. But, here, how can i retain signature of the ImaginaryType class? Which is that it takes real and img arguments?

b itself is a callable that has a signature with no arguments. It's the class of b that has a signature taking real and img. So just call signature of the type of b to get the signature for making a new ImaginaryType:
>>> signature(type(b))
<Signature (real, img)>
You'd have to do this to get the __init__ signature even if no __call__ was defined anywhere in the class tree; without __call__, instances of the class aren't callable, and have no signatures (instead of getting an empty signature, you'd get a TypeError trying to call signature on an instance that wasn't callable).

Conditional Inheritance based on arguments in Python

Being new to OOP, I wanted to know if there is any way of inheriting one of multiple classes based on how the child class is called in Python. The reason I am trying to do this is because I have multiple methods with the same name but in three parent classes which have different functionality. The corresponding class will have to be inherited based on certain conditions at the time of object creation.
For example, I tried to make Class C inherit A or B based on whether any arguments were passed at the time of instantiating, but in vain. Can anyone suggest a better way to do this?
class A:
def __init__(self,a):
self.num = a
def print_output(self):
print('Class A is the parent class, the number is 7',self.num)
class B:
def __init__(self):
self.digits=[]
def print_output(self):
print('Class B is the parent class, no number given')
class C(A if kwargs else B):
def __init__(self,**kwargs):
if kwargs:
super().__init__(kwargs['a'])
else:
super().__init__()
temp1 = C(a=7)
temp2 = C()
temp1.print_output()
temp2.print_output()
The required output would be 'Class A is the parent class, the number is 7' followed by 'Class B is the parent class, no number given'.
Thanks!

Whether you're just starting out with OOP or have been doing it for a while, I would suggest you get a good book on design patterns. A classic is Design Patterns by Gamma. Helm. Johnson and Vlissides.
Instead of using inheritance, you can use composition with delegation. For example:
class A:
def do_something(self):
# some implementation
class B:
def do_something(self):
# some implementation
class C:
def __init__(self, use_A):
# assign an instance of A or B depending on whether argument use_A is True
self.instance = A() if use_A else B()
def do_something(self):
# delegate to A or B instance:
self.instance.do_something()
Update
In response to a comment made by Lev Barenboim, the following demonstrates how you can make composition with delegation appear to be more like regular inheritance so that if class C has has assigned an instance of class A, for example, to self.instance, then attributes of A such as x can be accessed internally as self.x as well as self.instance.x (assuming class C does not define attribute x itself) and likewise if you create an instance of C named c, you can refer to that attribute as c.x as if class C had inherited from class A.
The basis for doing this lies with builtin methods __getattr__ and __getattribute__. __getattr__ can be defined on a class and will be called whenever an attribute is referenced but not defined. __getattribute__ can be called on an object to retrieve an attribute by name.
Note that in the following example, class C no longer even has to define method do_something if all it does is delegate to self.instance:
class A:
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
def do_something(self):
print('I am A')
class B:
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
def do_something(self):
print('I am B')
class C:
def __init__(self, use_A, x):
# assign an instance of A or B depending on whether argument use_A is True
self.instance = A(x) if use_A else B(x)
# called when an attribute is not found:
def __getattr__(self, name):
# assume it is implemented by self.instance
return self.instance.__getattribute__(name)
# something unique to class C:
def foo(self):
print ('foo called: x =', self.x)
c = C(True, 7)
print(c.x)
c.foo()
c.do_something()
# This will throw an Exception:
print(c.y)
Prints:
7
foo called: x = 7
I am A
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Ron\test\test.py", line 34, in <module>
print(c.y)
File "C:\Ron\test\test.py", line 23, in __getattr__
return self.instance.__getattribute__(name)
AttributeError: 'A' object has no attribute 'y'

I don't think you can pass values to the condition of the class from inside itself.
Rather, you can define a factory method like this :
class A:
def sayClass(self):
print("Class A")
class B:
def sayClass(self):
print("Class B")
def make_C_from_A_or_B(make_A):
class C(A if make_A else B):
def sayClass(self):
super().sayClass()
print("Class C")
return C()
make_C_from_A_or_B(True).sayClass()
which output :
Class A
Class C
Note: You can find information about the factory pattern with an example I found good enough on this article (about a parser factory)

Running super().__init__(value) where value is an #property

I'm just trying to grok how exactly Python handles this behind the scenes. So take this code snippet (from Effective Python by Brett Slatkin):
class Resistor(object):
def __init__(self, ohms):
self.ohms = ohms
self.voltage = 0
self.current = 0
class VoltageResistor(Resistor):
def __init__(self, ohms):
super().__init__(ohms)
self._voltage = 0
#property
def ohms(self):
return self._ohms
#ohms.setter
def ohms(self, ohms):
if ohms <= 0:
raise ValueError('{o} ohms must be > 0'.format(o=ohms))
self._ohms = ohms
#property
def voltage(self):
return self._voltage
#voltage.setter
def voltage(self, voltage):
self._voltage = voltage
self.current = self._voltage / self.ohms
VoltageResistor(-1) # fails
Running the super() call invokes the property check so that you can't instantiate with a zero or negative value. What is confusing me to me is that I would think that since the the __init__(ohms) call is being ran on the superclass, shouldn't it be in a different scope (the scope of the superclass) and thus exempt from invoking the #property check?

Scope doesn't come into play when working with object's attributes. Consider the following:
class A(object):
def __init__(self):
self.a = 1
def foo():
a = A()
a.a = 2
return a
def bar(a):
print(a.a)
bar(foo())
This example code will print 2. Note that within the scope of bar, there is no way to gain access to the scope of foo or even A.__init__. The class instance is carrying along all of it's attributes/properties with it (and a reference to it's class which has a reference to it's superclass, etc).
In your code, when you call VoltageResistor, an instance of VoltageResistor is created and passed to __init__ as self. When you call super.__init__(self), that VoltageResistor instance is passed along to Resistor.__init__. When it does self.ohms = ohms, python sees that self.ohms resolves to a property and you get the error. The tl;dr; here is that self is an instance of VoltageResistor and when working with attributes, the object on which the attributes are accessed is what is important, not the current scope).

To supplement the above excellent answer, just add the following line in the parent's constructor to get a better idea of what is going on:
class Resistor(object):
def __init__(self, ohms):
print (type(self).__name__)
self.ohms = ohms
It will print VoltageResistor and then throw a ValueError. The Python docs confirm this:
If c is an instance of C, c.x will invoke the getter, c.x = value will invoke the setter and del c.x the deleter.

ValueError Happens there because VoltageResistor.__init__ calls Resistor.__init__, which assigns self.ohms = -1. That assignment causes the #ohms.setter method from VoltageResistor to be called, and it immediately runs the validation code before object construction has completed.

What is the order of namespaces in inheritance?

A derived class has access to its base class member functions implicitly, unless I am mistaken. A derived class can also access its base class' attributes by prefixing a call to them like this: BaseClass.base_attribute. But I seemingly do not understand how instances of a derived class can use the methods of the base class. Example:
class Visitor():
""" Interface to Visitor
provide an interface to visitors that
perform an operation on a data collection """
def visitProduce():
pass
def visitMeat():
pass
def visitBakedGoods():
pass
def visitDairy():
pass
def visitNonFood():
pass
class PriceVisitor(Visitor):
__cost = 0.0 # total cost of groceries
def __init__(self):
self.__cost = 0.0
def visitProduce(self, p):
self.__cost += p.price()
def visitMeat(self, m):
self.__cost += m.price()
def visitBakedGoods(self, b):
self.__cost += b.price()
def visitDairy(self, d):
self.__cost += d.price()
def visitNonFood(self, nf):
self.__cost += nf.price()
class Groceries():
shopping_cart = [] # list of grocery items
def Groceries(self):
self.shopping_cart = []
def addProduce(self, p):
pass
def addMeat(self, m, lb):
pass
def addBakedGoods(self, b):
pass
def addDairy(self, d):
pass
def addNonFood(self, nf):
pass
def accept(self, v):
pass
def getShoppingCart(self):
print(self.shopping_cart)
def calculateCost(self, v):
for item in self.shopping_cart:
item.accept(v)
item.details()
print('Total cost is: $', v.__cost)
class Produce(Groceries):
def addProduce(self):
Groceries.shopping_cart.append(self)
def accept(self, v):
v.visitProduce(self)
def price(self):
return self.__price
def details(self):
print(self.__name, ' for: $', self.__price + '')
class Apples(Produce):
__name = None
__price = 3.25
def __init__(self, name):
self.__name = name
And here is a test of the Apple, Produce, Groceries, and PriceVisitor classes
import VisitorPattern as vp
def main():
# Visitor object
my_visitor = vp.PriceVisitor()
# Grocery object stores objects in its shopping_cart attribute
my_groceries = vp.Groceries()
# Add items
red_apple = vp.Apples('red apple')
gold_apple = vp.Apples('gold apple')
red_apple.addProduce()
gold_apple.addProduce()
my_groceries.getShoppingCart()
my_groceries.calculateCost(my_visitor)
if __name__ == '__main__':
main()
Now, the way I understand it is that upon the construction of the instance of Apple, it has access to Produce's method price(). Calling this method with an instance of the Apple class will then pass its own instance in place of the 'self'. The program then returns the value of the __price attribute belonging to the instance calling the method, in this case Apple. However, I get this error:
C:\Users\josep_000\Documents\School\Summer 2015\Python Assignment 4>python test.
py
[<VisitorPattern.Apples object at 0x026E0830>, <VisitorPattern.Apples object at
0x026E0910>]
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test.py", line 23, in <module>
main()
File "test.py", line 20, in main
my_groceries.calculateCost(my_visitor)
File "C:\Users\josep_000\Documents\School\Summer 2015\Python Assignment 4\Visi
torPattern.py", line 60, in calculateCost
item.accept(v)
File "C:\Users\josep_000\Documents\School\Summer 2015\Python Assignment 4\Visi
torPattern.py", line 71, in accept
v.visitProduce(self)
File "C:\Users\josep_000\Documents\School\Summer 2015\Python Assignment 4\Visi
torPattern.py", line 28, in visitProduce
self.__cost += p.price()
File "C:\Users\josep_000\Documents\School\Summer 2015\Python Assignment 4\Visi
torPattern.py", line 74, in price
return self.__price
AttributeError: 'Apples' object has no attribute '_Produce__price'
How does the binding and namespaces actually work in inheritance? I could just write the price() method in each of Produce's derived classes, but that would defeat the point of inheritance. I think my problem also stems from name mangling, but still don't know what happens if I don't make my attributes 'private'. Clarification would be great. Thanks
Edit
I declared the constructor of Groceries wrong:
# Wrong way
def Groceries(self):
self.shopping_cart = []
# Should be
def __init__(self):
self.__shopping_cart = []
The product of a full time job and homework in the evening

What is the order of namespaces in inheritance?
Python uses the Method Resolution Order to find the method bound to that instance of the object.
It also invokes name mangling, which is why you can't find the method, _Produce__price. You're trying to use .__price but when it is inherited, Python adds the name of the class to the front of the name. Don't use two underscores, change the two underscores to one, and your code will work as you expect, and you'll consistently look up ._price which won't invoke the name mangling.
See the docs for more on this:
https://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/classes.html#private-variables-and-class-local-references

Not really a direct answer to all your questions but I hope the following code sheds some light on how to do inheritance in Python.
class Produce(object):
def __init__(self, name=None, price=None):
self.__name = name
self.__price = price
def __str__(self):
return self.__name
#property
def bulk_price(self):
return self.__price * 100
class Apple(Produce):
def __init__(self, name="Apple"):
self.__name = name
self.__price = 3.25
super(self.__class__, self).__init__(self.__name, self.__price)
a = Apple("Gold Apple")
print a
print a.bulk_price
# Gold Apple
# 325.0
As you can see, I made name and price inaccessible in both classes. This way, I cannot just call them explicitly, i.e. a.__price. By using super as well in the child class, I am able to avoid referring to the base class further while still having access to its methods.

I have saw your error, your parent need to call child's function, but you have not transferred child to parent, so it will get the errors.Now I give my example:
class A:
def __init__(self, handler):
self.a = 5
self.real_handler = handler
def get(self):
print "value a = %d"%self.a
self.real_handler.put()
class B(A):
def __init__(self):
A.__init__(self, self) ##transport B to A
self.b = 3
def get(self):
print "value b is %d"%self.b
A.get(self)
def put(self):
self.b = 6
print "value b change into %d"%self.b
if __name__=="__main__":
b = B()
b.get()
In parent B, it will call the child A's fuction put(). I hope this can help you.