As answered brilliantly by agf here, a possible implementation of a Singleton in Python could be using this metaclass:
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super(Singleton, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
However, I do not understand the use of _instance. I know it's a dict used to store instances indexed by their class. However, it is declared as a class attribute (_instances = {}), and it is used as an attribute of cls (if cls not in cls._instances:). How can the two be the same?
Related
I am trying to create a Singleton class in Python using this code:
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super(Singleton, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
def clear(cls):
cls._instances = {}
class MyClass(metaclass=Singleton):
def my_attribute(*args):
if len(args) == 1:
MyClass.i_attribute = args[0]
elif len(args) == 0:
try:
return MyClass.i_attribute
except:
MyClass.i_attribute = 0
but the clear() method does not seem to work:
MyClass.my_attribute(42)
MyClass.clear()
MyClass.my_attribute() # still returns 42, but I expect 0
How do I delete the instance of MyClass so that I am back to 0 instances?
The singleton metaclass collects in the _instances attribute all the instantiated children. Therefore, if you want to clear the _instances attributes only for a specific class, you can:
Redefine the Singleton class, to make _instances an attribute of the class instantiated by the metaclass:
class Singleton(type):
"""
Singleton metaclass, which stores a single instance of the children class in the children class itself.
The metaclass exposes also a clearing mechanism, that clear the single instance:
* clear: use as follows 'ClassToClear.clear()
"""
def __init__(cls, name, bases, methods):
cls._instance = None
super().__init__(name, bases, methods)
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls._instance:
return cls._instance
cls._instance = super().__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instance
def clear(cls):
cls._instance = None
Using this new definition of the singleton, you can write a clear method that can be called by any of the classes initialized with the Singleton metaclass and it will clear the _instance attribute.
So in your case, MyClass.clear() would reset the _instance attribute to None.
Add a clear method, which removes only the children class from the Singleton._instances dictionary:
class SingletonRegistry(type):
"""
Singleton metaclass, which implements a registry of all classes that are created through this metaclass and
the corresponding instance of that class (added at the first creation).
The metaclass exposes also a clearing mechanism, that clears a specific class from the registry:
* clear: use as follows 'ClassToClear.clear()
* clear_all: use as follows 'SingletonRegistry.clear_all()
"""
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super(SingletonRegistry, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
def clear(cls):
_ = cls._instances.pop(cls, None)
def clear_all(*args, **kwargs):
SingletonRegistry._instances = {}
In this case, if you would like to clear only one specific child class, then you could write MyClass.clear(), which will cause the MyClass key to be removed from Singleton._instances dictionary.
This structure allows also to clear all key in the _instances dictionary by writing SingletonRegistry.clear_all().
user2357112 is right. Here is the correct code:
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super(Singleton, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
def clear(cls):
cls._instances = {}
class MyClass(metaclass=Singleton):
def my_attribute(*args):
my = MyClass()
if len(args) == 1:
my.i_attribute = args[0]
elif len(args) == 0:
try:
return my.i_attribute
except:
my.i_attribute = 0
return my.i_attribute
I need to keep tracks of instances of some classes (and do other stuff with those classes). I would like to not have to declare any extra code in the classes in question, thus everything should ideally be handled in the metaclass.
What I can't figure out is how to add a weak reference to each new instance of those classes. For example:
class Parallelizable(type):
def __new__(cls, name, bases, attr):
meta = super().__new__(cls, name, bases, attr)
# storing the instances in this WeakSet
meta._instances = weakref.WeakSet()
return meta
#property
def instances(cls):
return [x for x in cls._instances]
class Foo(metaclass=Parallelizable)
def __init__(self, name):
super().__init__()
self.name = name
# I would like to avoid having to do that - instead have the metaclass manage it somehow
self._instances.add(self)
Any ideas? I can't seem to find a hook on the metaclass side to get into the __init__ of Foo....
The method on the metaclass that is called when each new instance of its "afiliated" classes is __call__. If you put the code to record the instances in there, that is all the work you need:
from weakref import WeakSet
# A convenient class-level descriptor to retrieve the instances:
class Instances:
def __get__(self, instance, cls):
return [x for x in cls._instances]
class Parallelizable(type):
def __init__(cls, name, bases, attrs, **kw):
super().__init__(name, bases, attrs, **kw)
cls._instances = WeakSet()
cls.instances = Instances()
def __call__(cls, *args, **kw):
instance = super().__call__(*args, **kw)
cls._instances.add(instance)
return instance
The same code will work without the descriptor at all - it is just a nice way to have a class attribute that would report the instances. But if the WeakSet is enough, this code suffices:
from weakref import WeakSet
class Parallelizable(type):
def __init__(cls, name, bases, attrs, **kw):
super().__init__(name, bases, attrs, **kw)
cls.instances = WeakSet()
def __call__(cls, *args, **kw):
instance = super().__call__(*args, **kw)
cls.instances.add(instance)
return instance
You could decorate the attrs['__init__'] method in Parallizable.__new__:
import weakref
import functools
class Parallelizable(type):
def __new__(meta, name, bases, attrs):
attrs['__init__'] = Parallelizable.register(attrs['__init__'])
cls = super().__new__(meta, name, bases, attrs)
cls._instances = weakref.WeakSet()
return cls
#classmethod
def register(cls, method):
#functools.wraps(method)
def newmethod(self, *args, **kwargs):
method(self, *args, **kwargs)
self._instances.add(self)
return newmethod
#property
def instances(cls):
return [x for x in cls._instances]
class Foo(metaclass=Parallelizable):
def __init__(self, name):
"Foo.__init__ doc string"
super().__init__()
self.name = name
# Notice that Foo.__init__'s docstring is preserved even though the method has been decorated
help(Foo.__init__)
# Help on function __init__ in module __main__:
#
# __init__(self, name)
# Foo.__init__ doc string
stilton = Foo('Stilton')
gruyere = Foo('Gruyere')
print([inst.name for inst in Foo.instances])
# ['Gruyere', 'Stilton']
del stilton
print([inst.name for inst in Foo.instances])
# ['Gruyere']
How about this, its a class to inherit from, instead of a metaclass. I think its simpler but achieves the same point:
class AutoDiscovered:
instances = []
def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
obj = super().__new__(cls)
cls.instances.append(obj)
return obj
Usage:
class Foo(AutoDiscovered):
pass
a = Foo()
b = Foo()
print(Foo.instances) # [<__main__.Foo object at 0x7fdabd345430>, <__main__.Foo object at 0x7fdabd345370>]
I'm trying to extend my python knowledge. So I just wrote my very first singleton metaclass:
class Singleton(type):
_instance = None
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if not cls._instance:
cls._instance = super().__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instance
I just checked (for feedback) the good old stackoverflow. Lets see 'how others do it' and I found this solution:
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super().__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
Can somebody explain me why (the hack) do we need that dictionary?
This is to support inheritance. Using your solution, inheriting from a class built with the Singleton metaclass does not allow the subclass to have its own singelton.
class Singleton(type):
_instance = None
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if not cls._instance:
cls._instance = super().__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instance
class FirstSingleton(metaclass=Singleton):
pass
class SecondSingleton(FirstSingleton):
pass
x = FirstSingleton()
y = SecondSingleton()
x is y # True
As you see, the calls FirstSingleton() and SecondSingleton() both returned the same instance.
But using a dictionary allows a class and its subclasses to have different singletons.
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super().__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
class FirstSingleton(metaclass=Singleton):
pass
class SecondSingleton(FirstSingleton):
pass
x = FirstSingleton()
y = SecondSingleton()
x is y # False
The class and the subclass each returned their own instance of a singleton.
Below is the well known code for creating a singleton metaclass:
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super(Singleton, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
cls.x = 5
return cls._instances[cls]
class MyClass(metaclass=Singleton):
pass
m = MyClass()
v = MyClass()
print (m.x)
m.x = 420
print (v.x)
My question is why do we need to use the call function of type class again to initialize the class? Why can't we call the init method to do that like normal class initialization. Something like this :
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = cls(*args, **kwargs)
cls.x = 5
return cls._instances[cls]
class MyClass(metaclass=Singleton):
pass
m = MyClass()
v = MyClass()
print (m.x)
m.x = 420
print (v.x)
This is getting into an infinite loop anyways.
Because trying to creating an instance of a class by just calling it as you do in the line cls._instances[cls] = cls(*args, **kwargs) just by itself calls the metaclass __call__ which is the exact method where you attempt the call, as is explained here.
Now, if one thing, you should not really be using metaclasses just for creating singletons.
The Metaclass mechanism in Python is complicated - the problem you've hit on this question shows you are grasping now how simple inheritance and call to methods on super-classes work - and metaclasses are an order of magnitude more complicated than that.
And, beyond been complicated, classes with a custom metaclass can't be ordinarily combined with other classes that feature custom metaclasses, so the general rule is keeping their usage to a minimum anyway.
How to create a singleton class:
But for creatign a singleton, you can just place all your checks in the class ordinary __new__ method. No need to feedle with metaclasses - just plain class inheritance:
_instances = {}
class Singleton(object):
def __new__(cls, *args, **kw):
if not cls in _instances:
instance = super().__new__(cls)
_instances[cls] = instance
return _instances[cls]
And just inherit your singleton classes from this one.
I saw a lot of methods of making a singleton in Python and I tried to use the metaclass implementation with Python 3.2 (Windows), but it doesn"t seem to return the same instance of my singleton class.
class Singleton(type):
_instances = {}
def __call__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
if cls not in cls._instances:
cls._instances[cls] = super(Singleton, cls).__call__(*args, **kwargs)
return cls._instances[cls]
class MyClass(object):
__metaclass__ = Singleton
a = MyClass()
b = MyClass()
print(a is b) # False
I use the decorator implementation now which is working, but I'm wondering what is wrong with this implementation?
The metaclass syntax has changed in Python3. See the documentaition.
class MyClass(metaclass=Singleton):
pass
And it works:
>>> MyClass() is MyClass()
True