Changing the value of a Boolean Function in Python - python

I want to set the default value of a boolean function to be False and want to change it to True only for certain values of the input in between the code. Is there a way to do it?
I'm trying to write a simple DFS search code.
The code I'm using is this:
def visited(v):
return False
def explore(v):
visited(v) = True
for (v,w) in E:
if not visited(w):
explore(w)

A function is probably the wrong tool here. Instead, try a set:
def explore(v, visited=set()):
visited.add(v)
for (v,w) in E:
if w not in visited:
explore(w)
I'm using a sometimes unintuitive behavior of default arguments in Python for this example code because it's convenient, but you could also use a different way of maintaining a shared set, such as a wrapper function that initializes a blank set and then calls a recursive helper function. (That would let you explore multiple times by resetting the set each time.)

Assuming you have a myfunc function returning a boolean, that you want to modify the behaviour:
_myfunc = myfunc
def myfunc(*args):
if some_condition:
_myfunc(*args)
else:
return False
This way, you will trigger the actual function only in wished cases.
This solution overwrites the original name, but you are not obliged to do so.

No, you cannot set the return value of a function from outside the function. Instead, use a variable in the calling function.
For instance, here, you want to remember which nodes you visited. A set is good for remembering a set of objects.
def explore(v):
visited.add(v)
for (v,w) in E:
if w not in visited:
explore(w)
A couple of cautions about this:
If you call it twice, everything will be seen as already visited, because the state is tracked in a global. That's similar to what you already have but may or may not be what you want. If you want to be able to iterate twice, you need to pass this down as a parameter, and preferably add a second function that starts the recursion:
def explore(v):
return explore_down(v, set())
def explore_down(v, visited):
visited.add(v)
for (v,w) in E:
if w not in visited:
explore(w)
Also, depending on what type v and w are, you may get an error that they're not hashable, for which see this question.

Related

I can't put "continue" command in a definition?

Let's say,
def sample():
if a==1:
print(a)
else:
continue
for i in language:
a=i
sample()
I want to use this function in a loop, but the continue command gives me an error because there is no loop. What can I do?
Return a boolean from the function and based on the return value make continue or not because continue must be within a loop
continue keyword in python is only available in for or while loops. Also block defined variables like a are not available on the global scope.
I don't know what you want to achieve but assuming your code, you want to extract a condition into a function, something like this:
def condition(a):
return a == 1
def sample(a):
print(a)
for i in language:
a=i
if condition(a):
sample(a)
else:
continue
There are several best-practice patterns of exactly how to do this, depending on your needs.
0. Factor your code better
Before doing any of the below, stop and ask yourself if you can just do this instead:
def sample(a):
print(a)
for i in language:
if i != 1:
continue
sample(i)
This is so much better:
it's clearer to the reader (everything you need to understand the loop's control flow is entirely local to the loop - it's right there in the loop, we don't have to look anywhere else farther away like a function definition to know when or why or how the loop will do the next thing),
it's cleaner (less boilerplate code than any of the solutions below),
it's more efficient, technically (not that this should matter until you measure a performance problem, but this might appeal to you; going into a function and coming back out of it, plus somehow telling the loop outside the function to continue - that's more work to achieve the same thing), and
it's simpler (objectively: there is less code complected together - the loop behavior is no longer tied to the body of the sample function, for example).
But, if you must:
1. Add boolean return
The simplest change that works with your example is to return a boolean:
def sample(a):
if a==1:
print(a)
else:
return True
return False
for i in language:
if sample(i):
continue
However, don't just mindlessly always use True for continue - for each function, use the one that fits with the function. In fact, in well-factored code, the boolean return value will make sense without even knowing that you are using it in some loop to continue or not.
For example, if you have a function called check_if_valid, then the boolean return value just makes sense without any loops - it tells you if the input is valid - and at the same time, either of these loops is sensible depending on context:
for thing in thing_list:
if check_if_valid(thing):
continue
... # do something to fix the invalid things
for thing in thing_list:
if not check_if_valid(thing):
continue
... # do something only with valid things
2. Reuse existing return
If your function already returns something, or you can rethink your code so that returns make sense, then you can ask yourself: is there a good way to decide to continue based on that return value?
For example, let's say inside your sample function you were actually trying to do something like this:
def sample(a):
record = select_from_database(a)
if record.status == 1:
print(record)
else:
continue
Well then you can rewrite it like this:
def sample(a):
record = select_from_database(a)
if record.status == 1:
print(record)
return record
for i in language:
record = sample(a)
if record.status != 1:
continue
Of course in this simple example, it's cleaner to just not have the sample function, but I am trusting that your sample function is justifiably more complex.
3. Special "continue" return
If no existing return value makes sense, or you don't want to couple the loop to the return value of your function, the next simplest pattern is to create and return a special unique "sentinel" object instance:
_continue = object()
def sample(a):
if a==1:
print(a)
else:
return _continue
for i in language:
result = sample(i):
if result = _continue:
continue
(If this is part of a module's API, which is something that you are saying if you name it like sample instead of like _sample, then I would name the sentinel value continue_ rather than _continue... But I also would not make something like this part of an API unless I absolutely had to.)
(If you're using a type checker and it complains about returning an object instance conflicting with your normal return value, you can make a Continue class and return an instance of that instead of an instance of object(). Then the type hinting for the function return value can be a type union between your normal return type and the Continue type. If you have multiple control flow constructs in your code that you want to smuggle across function call lines like this.)
4. Wrap return value (and "monads")
Sometimes, if the type union thing isn't good enough for some reason, you may want to create a wrapper object, and have it store either your original return value, or indicate control flow. I only mention this option for completeness, without examples, because I think the previous options are better most of the time in Python. But if you take the time to learn about "Option types" and "maybe monads", it's kinda like that.
(Also, notice that in all of my examples, I fixed your backdoor argument passing through a global variable to be an explicit clearly passed argument. This makes the code easier to understand, predict, and verify for correctness - you might not see that yet but keep an eye out for implicit state passing making code harder to follow and keep correct as you grow as a developer, read more code by others, and deal with bugs.)
It is because the scope of the function doesn't know we are in a loop. You have to put the continue keyword inside the loop
continue keyword cannot be used inside a function. It must be inside the loop. There is a similar question here. Maybe you can do something like the following.
language = [1,1,1,2,3]
a = 1
def sample():
if a == 1:
print(a)
return False
else:
return True
for i in language:
if sample():
continue
else:
a = i
OR something like this:
language = [1,1,1,2,3]
a = 1
def gen(base):
for item in base:
if a == 1:
yield a
else:
continue
for i in gen(language):
a = i
print(a)

Automatically return from a function based on another function call

Lets say I have a function myFunc defined as
def myFunc(value):
return value if isinstance(value, int) else None
Now wherever in my project I use myFunc the enclosing funciton should return automatically if the value returned from myFunc is None and should continue if some integer value is returned
For example:
def dumbFunc():
# some code
# goes here..
result = myFunc('foo')
# some code
# goes here..
This funciton should automatically behave like..
def dumbFunc():
# some code
# goes here..
result = myFunc('foo')
if not result:
return
# some code
# goes here..
PS - I don't know whether this thing even possible or not.
This is simply not possible.
Apart from exceptions, you cannot give a called function the ability to impact the control flow of the calling scope. So a function call foo() can never interrupt the control flow without throwing an exception. As a consumer of the function, you (the calling function) always have the responsibility yourself to handle such cases and decide about your own control flow.
And it is a very good idea to do it like that. Just the possibility that a function call might interrupt my control flow without having a possibility to react on it first sounds like a pure nightmare. Just alone for the ability to release and cleanup resources, it is very important that the control flow is not taken from me.
Exceptions are the notable exception from this, but of course this is a deeply rooted language feature which also still gives me the ability to act upon it (by catching exceptions, and even by having finally blocks to perform clean up tasks). Exceptions are deliberately not silent but very loud, so that interruptions from the deterministic control flow are clearly visible and have a minimum impact when properly handled.
But having a silent feature that does neither give any control nor feedback would be just a terrible idea.
If myFunc is used at 100 places in my project, everywhere I need to put an if condition after it.
If your code is like that that you could just return nothing from any function that calls myFunc without having to do anything, then either you are building an unrealistic fantasy project, or you simply are not aware of the implications this can have to the calling code of the functions that would be returned that way.
ok, I'll bite.
on the one hand, this isn't really possible. if you want to check something you have to have a line in your code that checks it.
there are a few ways you could achieve something like this, but i think you may have already found the best one.
you already have this function:
def myFunc(value):
return value if isinstance(value, int) else None
I would probably have done:
def myFunc(value):
return isinstance(value, int)
but either way you could use it:
def dumb_func():
value = do_something()
if myFunc(value):
return
do_more()
return value
alternately you could use try and except
I would raise a TypeError, seeing as that seems to be what you are checking:
def myFunc(value):
if not isinstance(value, int):
raise TypeError('myFunc found that {} is not an int'.format(value))
then you can use this as such
def dumb_func():
value = do_something()
try:
myFunc(value):
Except TypeError as e:
print e # some feedback that this has happened, but no error raised
return
do_more()
return value
for bonus points you could define a custom exception (which is safer because then when you catch that specific error you know it wasn't raised by anything else in your code, also if you did that you could be lazier eg:)
Class CustomTypeError(TypeError):
pass
def dumb_func():
try:
value = do_something()
myFunc(value):
do_more()
return value
Except CustomTypeError as e:
print e # some feedback that this has happened, but no error raised
return
but none of this gets around the fact that if you want to act based on the result of a test, you have to check that result.
Python has a ternary conditional operator, and the syntax you used is right, so this will work:
def myFunc(value):
return value if isinstance(value, int) else None
def dumbFunc():
print("Works?")
result = myFunc(5)
print(result)
dumbFunc()
Result:
Works?
5
I want the function to return automatically in that case
This is not possible. To do that, you have to check the return value of myFunc() and act upon it.
PS: You could do that with a goto statement, but Python, fortunately, doesn't support this functionality.

How to pass a parameter as a default?

I want to use the default of a parameter, but include its name in the call. I thought that setting the parameter to None would do that, but it doesn't.
For example:
def a(num=3):
print(num)
a(num=None) #returns "None", not "3" like I want it to.
How can I use the default of a named parameter while including it in the call? (Is it even possible?)
Just to explain why I would want to do something like this (since maybe it's a problem in my overall coding style):
I often times have code like this
def add(num, numToAdd=1):
return num+numToAdd
def addTwice(num, numToAdd=None):
for i in range(2):
num=add(num, numToAdd=numToAdd)
return num
addTwice(3) #throws an error instead of returning 5
What I want is for addTwice's numToAdd to always use the default of add's numToAdd, no matter what it is.
The reason: maybe later in the code I realize that it's better to add 2 as the default when executing add than it is to add 1.
So I change it to
def add(num, numToAdd=2):
return num+numToAdd
But, this won't help anything unless I can always specify in addTwice to use the default if it receives a default.
So, that's the rationale.
In other words: I'm having a function (the first function) call another function (the second function), and if the first function has to use a default value, I want it to default to being the default value on the second function. That way, I only have to change the default value on the second function (not every single function that calls it as well) in order to change the default functionality.
There's no built-in support to explicitly use the default value of a parameter. If you don't want to leave the parameter out at the call site, you'd have to retrieve the default value very manually:
import inspect
a(num=inspect.signature(a).parameters['num'].default)
which wouldn't be worth it in most cases.
def a(num=None):
if num is None:
num = 3
print(num)
a(num=None) # prints 3
a() # prints 3
... I guess ... maybe
alternatively to explain default params
def a(num=3):
print(num)
a(num=None) # prints None
a() # prints 3
No, you can't: that's a contradiction in terms. The default value is used if and only if you do not supply a value in the arguments list. If you supply a value, then the default cannot be used within the routine.
There is a great answer on how to do this (if you decide that the default-getting functionality I asked for is really what you want). But, I just wanted to point out that in practice I believe what I was trying to achieve is normally done with global variables.
That is, the usual way to do what I wanted to do is:
DEFAULT_NUM_TO_ADD = 1
def add(num, numToAdd=DEFAULT_NUM_TO_ADD):
return num+numToAdd
def addTwice(num, numToAdd=DEFAULT_NUM_TO_ADD):
for i in range(2):
num=add(num, numToAdd=numToAdd)
return num
addTwice(3) # returns 5
This allows me to quickly change the default, and the same default is used for both functions. It's explicit and very clear; it's pythonic.

empty function object in python

I've heard that python functions are objects, similar to lists or dictionaries, etc. However, what would be a similar way of performing this type of action with a function?
# Assigning empty list to 'a'
a = list()
# Assigning empty function to 'a'
a = lambda: pass
# ???
How would you do this? Further, is it necessary or proper?
Here is the sense in which I would like to use it for better context:
I have a QListWidget for selecting items which are associated with keys in a dictionary. The values in this dictionary are also dictionaries, which hold certain properties of the items, which I can add. These certain properties are stored as keys, and the values in them are initialized or updated by calling different functions. So, I'm storing a variable in the window which gets updated when a button is pressed to tell this script which property to update.
As you can see, I would like to store the function to map to the data using the correct function based on the situation.
# Get selection from the list
name = selected_item
# Initialize an empty function
f = lambda: pass
# Use property that is being added now, which was updated by the specific button that was pushed
property_list = items[name][self.property_currently_being_added]
if self.property_currently_being_added == "prop1":
f = make_property1()
elif self.property_currently_being_added == "prop2":
f = make_property2()
elif self.property_currently_being_added == "prop3":
f = make_property3()
elif self.property_currently_being_added == "prop4":
f = make_property4()
# map the certain function to the data which was retrieved earlier
added_property = map(f, data)
property_list.append(added_property)
First, the reason this doesn't work:
a = lamdba: pass
… is that lambda only allows an expression, and defines a function that returns the value of the expression. Since pass is a statement, not an expression, this is illegal.
However, this works just fine:
a = lambda: None
In Python, a function that falls off the end without a return statement always returns None. So, these are equivalent:
def a(): return None
def a(): pass
However, I don't see why you want to write this as a lambda and an assignment anyway; the def is shorter, and more readable, and gives you an introspectable function object with a nice name (a instead of <lambda>), and so on. The only reasons to ever use lambda are when you don't want to give the function a name, or when you need to define the function inside an expression. Obviously neither of those are true, because you use the lambda directly inside an assignment statement. So, just use def.
Meanwhile, this is in a sense an "empty function", or at least as empty as possible (as you can see by, e.g., calling dis.dis(a), it still takes two bytecodes to do nothing but fall off the end and return None), but it's not useful for your case. You don't want an "empty function". If you try passing your a to map, you're just going to get a TypeError, because you're trying to call a function of no arguments with one argument. (Because that's what map does.)
What you might want is an identity function, which just returns its argument as-is. Like this:
def a(x): return x
But I'm not sure that's what you want. Did you want to append data as-is in that case? Or did you want to do something different, like return early, or raise an exception, or not append anything, or …?
Finally, I don't see why you want a function at all. Why not just not call map if you have nothing to map? You have a perfectly good else clause that already catches that case (especially handy if what you want to do is return early or raise…). Or, if you prefer, you can start with f = None, and then use an if f: do decide whether to map or not. Or, if you really want:
added_property = [f(element) if f else element for element in data]
… or …
added_property = map(f, data) if f else data
As one last note, instead of a long if/elif chain that repeats the same thing over and over again, you might want a dict:
propfuncs = {'prop1': make_property1(),
'prop2': make_property2(),
'prop3': make_property3(),
'prop4': make_property4()}
Then, all that cruft turns into these two lines:
f = propfuncs.get(self.property_currently_being_added)
added_property = map(f, data) if f else data
Or course an even better design might be to replace all those make_propertyN functions with a single function that you call as make_property(1) or make_property('prop1')… but without seeing what they actually do, I can't be sure of that.
For completeness and since the title is "empty function object in python", more general case is an empty function object that takes any number of parameters, so you can use it in any callback. It's this one:
callback = lambda *_, **__: None
Explanation is here: http://echochamber.me/viewtopic.php?t=64825
I am surprised to learn that you can even do...
def a(): "This is a test"
a()
this feels so much like you're looking for a Nothing functor, I am guessing that if you had knowledge of Monads you wouldn't even need an empty function , as inspiration PyMonad has a nice Nothing implementation, I usually like to create my own, but it's a good starting point.

How to use a callback function in python?

I wonder how to correctly use python 2.7 callback functions.
I have some callback functions from Cherrypy auth examples in my code.
(These callbacks return a function that can evaluate to True or False, depending on the logged in user being in a group or not.)
I wonder if a callback is executed or not if I write a piece of code like this:
Given the definition from the library is:
def member_of(groupname):
def check():
if groupname == 'admin':
if cherrypy.request.login == 'joe':
return True
if cherrypy.request.login == 'toni':
return True
return False
return False
# .... (other groups checked in the same way)
return check # returns a callback function from my understanding?
How can I apply and execute the callback in my code?
If I put it like this:
if member_of('admin'):
do_something()
else:
do_something_else()
Will this execute the calllback and check for the admin group? Or will it find out if the value of "member_of" is a function definition and a function definition is probably always a "True" value (or maybe a False value) but both are wrong, because it needs to be executed
Can you enlighten me on this? How can I make sure a callback is executed? An how can I pass it around as it is?
In python, like in many other languages, a variable can also contain a function and you can pass them around like other variables that contain e.g. numbers or strings.
CherryPy's member_of function itself does return a function in your example.
I am explaining it in simple steps:
If you write member_of() it returns the result of the function member_of() which is the function with the name check in this case.
cb_function = member_of('admin')
At this point the variable cb_function holds the result of calling the function member_of, and in the last line member_of returns check, which was defined within the function member_of as another function!
You have to call the first result again, because you can and you have to treat it in almost the same way as a local function, that you defined in the current context, to get the final result, by doing something like:
my_result = cb_function()
And then you would continue and use the result. For example you could check its boolean value:
if my_result:
# do something
...
The 3 steps from above together can be written shorter:
cb_function = member_of('admin')
if cb_function():
# do something
...
Or even shorter:
if member_of('admin')():
# do something
...
At first it may appear a little strange in python to have the double ()(), but if you think about it for a while it makes sense.
If you execute it, it is plain simple.
member_of() will return method object check.
you have to execute to get result by doing something like if member_of('admin')():
or,
k=member_of('admin')
if k():
To do your task.

Categories

Resources