I realize the question is a bit specific, sorry.
I'm trying to solve a python puzzle where what I input get exec'ed. My aim is to store something of arbitrary length in the global name space (e.g, change the variable target). You'll see below that my input is limited to 35 chars.
Here's the program:
#!/usr/bin/env python2
from sys import modules
modules.clear()
del modules
raw_input2 = raw_input
exception2 = Exception
__builtins__.__dict__.clear()
__builtins__ = None
target = None # change this !
while 1:
try:
scope = {'r':0}
exec 'r = ' + raw_input2()[:35] in scope
print 'Result:', scope['r']
except exception2, e:
print "Error: ", e
As said, my point is to store data somewhere, since vars get reset each loop.
I know I could use globals()['target']=xxx, but the builtins were disabled.
In theory I could use global target;target=xxx but this executes in scope, not in the global scope (also I think the global keyword must come at the beginning of the anonymous function)
I know all variables are stored in some __dict__ object, but the only way I know to write in it is via globals()['target']=xxx which is disabled
I know you can painfully access the super-object with ().__class__.__base__, but with the limit of 35 characters, it doesn't seem to be the way (this string alone is 21 chars already, you need two more to start with 0;, so only 11 char remaining to assign something...).
Any ideas ?
Thanks!
The answer is: write in __builtins__.
Example input:
1;__builtins__['a']="string1"
Result: 1
1;__builtins__['a']+="string2"
... which actually seems very simple since it is right above the variable marked # change this in the question. I do not fully understand yet why the __builtins__ var is passed in the exec scope, especially since it should be None (and hence not a dictionary), but is assignable like a dictionary.
But it works, tested in python 2.7
Related
I am very new to Python, as you can probably tell from the code. To begin, I am trying to have the user input their name and store that in a global variable that I can access all throughout my code...preferably named uName.
What's happening is during the loop cycle, it asks the user 'Is this your name?' after they input the first response. If I hit type anything but 'yes' or 'Yes', it will re-ask them to input the name. BUT, when they finally hit 'Yes', the program prints the very first name they entered.
Also, any tips on code structure or wording is helpful...
game.py
from decisions import *
import decisions
global globalname
globalname = ''
def gameEngine(uName):
looper = 0
while looper == 0:
print ('You said your name is, ') + uName + ('...')
clarifier = raw_input('Is that correct?\n')
if clarifier == 'yes' or clarifier == 'Yes':
namePrinter(answer)
else:
decisions.userDecisions(username)
def namePrinter(uName):
print uName
gameEngine(answer)
decisions.py
username = ''
def userDecisions(inputs):
response = raw_input("Please enter your name...\n>>> ")
return response
answer = userDecisions(username)
The specific issue that you are encountering is that you are first running the contents of decisions.py though the import statement in game.py. Through that, you have set the variable "answer" to be equal to the first name that the user inputs.
Then you are calling the gameEngine function in game.py, supplying the "answer" variable from decisions.py as the argument, which is stored in "uName". Upon the user entering another name the name is not stored anywhere and is thrown out with the following line.
decisions.userDecisions(username)
You can assign the return of that statement to a variable such as "uName", and that will get you closer to what you want to do.
uName = decisions.userDecisions(username)
The next issue is that when you are printing out the name, you are printing out the variable "answer" as opposed to "uName". This is what is mainly causing the issue of the first name always being printed out.
namePrinter(answer)
This could be resolved by passing in the "uName" variable instead.
namePrinter(uName)
Also if you want the final chosen name to be stored in the global variable you can assign the final user chosen name to the gloabl variable after the user confirms that the nameis correct.
globalname = uName
However, you may want to be careful about a few parts of the structure of your code.
First, you may want to try not to use global variables. Instead you should be passing around the name though the functions which use it. If you have other player information that you need to access often, you can create a Player class and object to store that information in a single object which can be passed around into functions as needed.
Second, as the userDecisions function does not use its arguement "inputs", you can remove that arguement, as it isn't used.
Third, you may want to be careful about running code through import statements alone. Generally when you are importing a source file, you should be importing the functions, and not rely upon imports to directly run code. For example you can remove the non-function lines of decisions.py and simply run the following in game.py instead.
gameEngine(decisions.userDecisions())
I reccomend that you look up some resources on functions and passing arguement in Python, as they might be able to explain the underlying concepts a bit better.
You have screwed up with the variables and their scope. Read more about them here.
To give you a perspective regarding the scope of variables concisely, look at this code snippet:
# This is a global variable
a = 0
if a == 0:
# This is still a global variable
b = 1
def my_function(c):
# this is a local variable
d = 3
print(c)
print(d)
# Now we call the function, passing the value 7 as the first and only parameter
my_function(7)
# a and b still exist
print(a)
print(b)
# c and d don't exist anymore -- these statements will give us name errors!
print(c)
print(d)
Regarding your code, you may want to have a look at these issues:
The answer variable is not accessible in the game.py module.
So is the case with username variable in the decisions.userDecisions(username) call.
The decisions.userDecisions(username) call in the gameEngine(uName) method is not storing the response to any variable and hence the response will be lost.
You are declaring global variable globalname but not assigning any value to it (of course other than '').
P.S.: I was tempted to do your homework for you, but then probably this is good enough information for you to learn more. ;)
I have found some vaguely related questions to this question, but not any clean and specific solution for CPython. And I assume that a "valid" solution is interpreter specific.
First the things I think I understand:
locals() gives a non-modifiable dictionary.
A function may (and indeed does) use some kind of optimization to access its local variables
frame.f_locals gives a locals() like dictionary, but less prone to hackish things through exec. Or at least I have been less able to do hackish undocumented things like the locals()['var'] = value ; exec ""
exec is capable to do weird things to the local variables, but it is not reliable --e.g. I read somewhere that it doesn't work in Python 3. Haven't tested.
So I understand that, given those limitations, it will never be safe to add extra variables to the locals, because it breaks the interpreter structure.
However, it should be possible to change a variable already existing, isn't it?
Things that I considered
In a function f, one can access the f.func_code.co_nlocals and f.func_code.co_varnames.
In a frame, the variables can be accessed / checked / read through the frame.f_locals. This is in the use case of setting a tracer through sys.settrace.
One can easily access the function in which a frame is --cosidering the use case of setting a trace and using it to "do things" in with the local variables given a certain trigger or whatever.
The variables should be somewhere, preferably writeable... but I am not capable of finding it. Even if it is an array (for interpreter efficient access), or I need some extra C-specific wiring, I am ready to commit to it.
How can I achieve that modification of variables from a tracer function or from a decorated wrapped function or something like that?
A full solution will be of course appreciated, but even some pointers will help me greatly, because I'm stuck here with lots of non writeable dictionaries :-/
Edit: Hackish exec is doing things like this or this
It exists an undocumented C-API call for doing things like that:
PyFrame_LocalsToFast
There is some more discussion in this PyDev blog post. The basic idea seems to be:
import ctypes
...
frame.f_locals.update({
'a': 'newvalue',
'b': other_local_value,
})
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(
ctypes.py_object(frame), ctypes.c_int(0))
I have yet to test if this works as expected.
Note that there might be some way to access the Fast directly, to avoid an indirection if the requirements is only modification of existing variable. But, as this seems to be mostly non-documented API, source code is the documentation resource.
Based on the notes from MariusSiuram, I wrote a recipe that show the behavior.
The conclusions are:
we can modify an existing variable
we can delete an existing variable
we can NOT add a new variable.
So, here is the code:
import inspect
import ctypes
def parent():
a = 1
z = 'foo'
print('- Trying to add a new variable ---------------')
hack(case=0) # just try to add a new variable 'b'
print(a)
print(z)
assert a == 1
assert z == 'foo'
try:
print (b)
assert False # never is going to reach this point
except NameError, why:
print("ok, global name 'b' is not defined")
print('- Trying to remove an existing variable ------')
hack(case=1)
print(a)
assert a == 2
try:
print (z)
except NameError, why:
print("ok, we've removed the 'z' var")
print('- Trying to update an existing variable ------')
hack(case=2)
print(a)
assert a == 3
def hack(case=0):
frame = inspect.stack()[1][0]
if case == 0:
frame.f_locals['b'] = "don't work"
elif case == 1:
frame.f_locals.pop('z')
frame.f_locals['a'] += 1
else:
frame.f_locals['a'] += 1
# passing c_int(1) will remove and update variables as well
# passing c_int(0) will only update
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(
ctypes.py_object(frame),
ctypes.c_int(1))
if __name__ == '__main__':
parent()
The output would be like:
- Trying to add a new variable ---------------
1
foo
ok, global name 'b' is not defined
- Trying to remove an existing variable ------
2
foo
- Trying to update an existing variable ------
3
I am writing some program using python and the z3py module.
What I am trying to do is the following: I extract a constraint of an if or a while statement from a function which is located in some other file. Additionally I extract the used variables in the statement as well as their types.
As I do not want to parse the constraint by hand into a z3py friendly form, I tried to use evaluate to do this for me. Therefore I used the tip of the following page: Z3 with string expressions
Now the problem is: I do not know how the variables in the constraint are called. But it seems as I have to name the handle of each variable like the actual variable. Otherwise evaluate won't find it. My code looks like this:
solver = Solver()
# Look up the constraint:
branch = bd.getBranchNum(0)
constr = branch.code
# Create handle for each variable, depending on its type:
for k in mapper.getVariables():
var = mapper.getVariables()[k]
if k in constr:
if var.type == "intNum":
Int(k)
else:
Real(k)
# Evaluate constraint, insert the result and solve it:
f = eval(constr)
solver.insert(f)
solve(f)
As you can see I saved the variables and constraints in classes. When executing this code I get the following error:
NameError: name 'real_x' is not defined
If I do not use the looping over the variables, but instead the following code, everything works fine:
solver = Solver()
branch = bd.getBranchNum(0)
constr = branch.code
print(constr)
real_x = Real('real_x')
int_y = Int('int_y')
f = eval(constr)
print(f)
solver.insert(f)
solve(f)
The problem is: I do not know, that the variables are called "real_x" or "int_y". Furthermore I do not know how many variables there are used, which means I have to use some dynamic thing like a loop.
Now my question is: Is there a way around this? What can I do to tell python that the handles already exist, but have a different name? Or is my approach completely wrong and I have to do something totally different?
This kind of thing is almost always a bad idea (see Why eval/exec is bad for more details), but "almost always" isn't "always", and it looks like you're using a library that was specifically designed to be used this way, in which case you've found one of the exceptions.
And at first glance, it seems like you've also hit one of the rare exceptions to the Keep data out of your variable names guideline (also see Why you don't want to dynamically create variables). But you haven't.
The only reason you need these variables like real_x to exist is so that eval can see them, right? But the eval function already knows how to look for variables in a dictionary instead of in your global namespace. And it looks like what you're getting back from mapper.getVariables() is a dictionary.
So, skip that whole messy loop, and just do this:
variables = mapper.getVariables()
f = eval(constr, globals=variables)
(In earlier versions of Python, globals is a positional-only argument, so just drop the globals= if you get an error about that.)
As the documentation explains, this gives the eval function access to your actual variables, plus the ones the mapper wants to generate, and it can do all kinds of unsafe things. If you want to prevent unsafe things, do this:
variables = dict(mapper.getVariables())
variables['__builtins__'] = {}
f = eval(constr, globals=variables)
[EDIT 00]: I've edited several times the post and now even the title, please read below.
I just learned about the format string method, and its use with dictionaries, like the ones provided by vars(), locals() and globals(), example:
name = 'Ismael'
print 'My name is {name}.'.format(**vars())
But I want to do:
name = 'Ismael'
print 'My name is {name}.' # Similar to ruby
So I came up with this:
def mprint(string='', dictionary=globals()):
print string.format(**dictionary)
You can interact with the code here:
http://labs.codecademy.com/BA0B/3#:workspace
Finally, what I would love to do is to have the function in another file, named my_print.py, so I could do:
from my_print import mprint
name= 'Ismael'
mprint('Hello! My name is {name}.')
But as it is right now, there is a problem with the scopes, how could I get the the main module namespace as a dictionary from inside the imported mprint function. (not the one from my_print.py)
I hope I made myself uderstood, if not, try importing the function from another module. (the traceback is in the link)
It's accessing the globals() dict from my_print.py, but of course the variable name is not defined in that scope, any ideas of how to accomplish this?
The function works if it's defined in the same module, but notice how I must use globals() because if not I would only get a dictionary with the values within mprint() scope.
I have tried using nonlocal and dot notation to access the main module variables, but I still can't figure it out.
[EDIT 01]: I think I've figured out a solution:
In my_print.py:
def mprint(string='',dictionary=None):
if dictionary is None:
import sys
caller = sys._getframe(1)
dictionary = caller.f_locals
print string.format(**dictionary)
In test.py:
from my_print import mprint
name = 'Ismael'
country = 'Mexico'
languages = ['English', 'Spanish']
mprint("Hello! My name is {name}, I'm from {country}\n"
"and I can speak {languages[1]} and {languages[0]}.")
It prints:
Hello! My name is Ismael, I'm from Mexico
and I can speak Spanish and English.
What do you think guys? That was a difficult one for me!
I like it, much more readable for me.
[EDIT 02]: I've made a module with an interpolate function, an Interpolate class and an attempt for a interpolate class method analogous to the function.
It has a small test suite and its documented!
I'm stuck with the method implementation, I don't get it.
Here's the code: http://pastebin.com/N2WubRSB
What do you think guys?
[EDIT 03]: Ok I have settled with just the interpolate() function for now.
In string_interpolation.py:
import sys
def get_scope(scope):
scope = scope.lower()
caller = sys._getframe(2)
options = ['l', 'local', 'g', 'global']
if scope not in options[:2]:
if scope in options[2:]:
return caller.f_globals
else:
raise ValueError('invalid mode: {0}'.format(scope))
return caller.f_locals
def interpolate(format_string=str(),sequence=None,scope='local',returns=False):
if type(sequence) is str:
scope = sequence
sequence = get_scope(scope)
else:
if not sequence:
sequence = get_scope(scope)
format = 'format_string.format(**sequence)'
if returns is False:
print eval(format)
elif returns is True:
return eval(format)
Thanks again guys! Any opinions?
[EDIT 04]:
This is my last version, it has a test, docstrings and describes some limitations I've found:
http://pastebin.com/ssqbbs57
You can quickly test the code here:
http://labs.codecademy.com/BBMF#:workspace
And clone grom git repo here:
https://github.com/Ismael-VC/python_string_interpolation.git
Modules don't share namespaces in python, so globals() for my_print is always going to be the globals() of my_print.py file ; i.e the location where the function was actually defined.
def mprint(string='', dic = None):
dictionary = dic if dic is not None else globals()
print string.format(**dictionary)
You should pass the current module's globals() explicitly to make it work.
Ans don't use mutable objects as default values in python functions, it can result in unexpected results. Use None as default value instead.
A simple example for understanding scopes in modules:
file : my_print.py
x = 10
def func():
global x
x += 1
print x
file : main.py
from my_print import *
x = 50
func() #prints 11 because for func() global scope is still
#the global scope of my_print file
print x #prints 50
Part of your problem - well, the reason its not working - is highlighted in this question.
You can have your function work by passing in globals() as your second argument, mprint('Hello my name is {name}',globals()).
Although it may be convenient in Ruby, I would encourage you not to write Ruby in Python if you want to make the most out of the language.
Language Design Is Not Just Solving Puzzles: ;)
http://www.artima.com/forums/flat.jsp?forum=106&thread=147358
Edit: PEP-0498 solves this issue!
The Template class from the string module, also does what I need (but more similar to the string format method), in the end it also has the readability I seek, it also has the recommended explicitness, it's in the Standard Library and it can also be easily customized and extended.
http://docs.python.org/2/library/string.html?highlight=template#string.Template
from string import Template
name = 'Renata'
place = 'hospital'
job = 'Dr.'
how = 'glad'
header = '\nTo Ms. {name}:'
letter = Template("""
Hello Ms. $name.
I'm glad to inform, you've been
accepted in our $place, and $job Red
will ${how}ly recieve you tomorrow morning.
""")
print header.format(**vars())
print letter.substitute(vars())
The funny thing is that now I'm getting more fond of using {} instead of $ and I still like the string_interpolation module I came up with, because it's less typing than either one in the long run. LOL!
Run the code here:
http://labs.codecademy.com/BE3n/3#:workspace
I find myself doing something like this constantly to pull GET args into vars:
some_var = self.request.get('some_var', None)
other_var = self.request.get('other_var', None)
if None in [some_var, other_var]:
logging.error("some arg was missing in " + self.request.path)
exit()
What I would really want to do is:
pull_args('some_var', 'other_var')
And that would somehow pull these variables to be available in current scope, or log an error and exit if not (or return to calling method if possible). Is this possible in Python?
First, a disclaimer: "pulling" variables into the local scope in any way other than var = something is really really really not recommended. It tends to make your code really confusing for someone who isn't intimately familiar with what you're doing (i.e. anyone who isn't you, or who is you 6 months in the future, etc.)
That being said, for educational purposes only, there is a way. Your pull_args function could be implemented like this:
def pull_args(request, *args):
pulled = {}
try:
for a in args:
pulled[a] = request[a]
except AttributeError:
logging.error("some arg was missing in " + self.request.path)
exit()
else:
caller = inspect.stack()[1][0]
caller.f_locals.update(pulled)
At least, something to that effect worked when I came up with it probably about a year ago. I wouldn't necessarily count on it continuing to work in future Python versions. (Yet another reason not to do it) I personally have never found a good reason to use this code snippet.
No it's not and also pointless. Writing to outer namespaces completely destroys the purpose of namespaces, which is having only the things around that you explicitly set. Use lists!
def pull_args(*names):
return [self.request.get(name, None) for name in names]
print None in pull_args('some_var', 'other_var')
Probably this works too, to check if all _var are set:
print all(name in self.request for name in ('some_var', 'other_var'))