Develop Reference

Selecting executed method of class at runtime in python?

This question is very generic but I don't think it is opinion based. It is about software design and the example prototype is in python:
I am writing a program which goal it is to simulate some behaviour (doesn't matter). The data on which the simulation works is fixed, but the simulated behaviour I want to change at every startup time. The simulation behaviour can't be changed at runtime.
Example:
Simulation behaviour is defined like:
usedMethod = static
The program than looks something like this:
while(true)
result = static(object) # static is the method specified in the behaviour
# do something with result
The question is, how is the best way to deal with exchangeable defined functions? So another run of the simulation could look like this
while(true)
result = dynamic(object)
if dynamic is specified as usedMethod. The first thing that came in my mind was an if-else block, where I ask, which is the used method and then execute this on. This solution would not be very good, because every time I add new behaviour I have to change the if-else block and the if-else block itself would maybe cost performance, which is important, too. The simulations should be fast.
So a solution I could think of was using a function pointer (output and input of all usedMethods should be well defined and so it should not be a problem). Then I initalize the function pointer at startup, where the used method is defined.
The problem I currently have, that the used method is not a function per-se, but is a method of a class, which depends heavily on the intern members of this class, so the code is more looking like this:
balance = BalancerClass()
while(true)
result = balance.static(object)
...
balance.doSomething(input)
So my question is, what is a good solution to deal with this problem?
I thought about inheriting from the balancerClass (this would then be an abstract class, I don't know if this conecpt exists in python) and add a derived class for every used method. Then I create the correct derived object which is specified in the simulation behaviour an run-time.
In my eyes, this is a good solution, because it encapsulates the methods from the base class itself. And every used method is managed by its own class, so it can add new internal behaviour if needed.
Furthermore the doSomething method shouldn't change, so therefore it is implemented the base class, but depends on the intern changed members of the derived class.
I don't know in general if this software design is good to solve my problem or if I am missing a very basic and easy concept.
If you have a another/better solution please tell me and it would be good, if you provide the advantages/disadvantages. Also could you tell me advantages/disadvantages of my solution, which I didn't think of?

Hey I can be wrong but what you are looking for boils down to either dependency injection or strategy design pattern both of which solve the problem of executing dynamic code at runtime via a common interface without worrying about the actual implementations. There are also much simpler ways just like u desrcibed creating an abstract class(Interface) and having all the classes implement this interface.
I am giving brief examples fo which here for your reference:
Dependecy Injection(From wikipedia):
In software engineering, dependency injection is a technique whereby one object supplies the dependencies of another object. A "dependency" is an object that can be used, for example as a service. Instead of a client specifying which service it will use, something tells the client what service to use. The "injection" refers to the passing of a dependency (a service) into the object (a client) that would use it. The service is made part of the client's state.
Passing the service to the client, rather than allowing a client to build or find the service, is the fundamental requirement of the pattern.
Python does not have such a conecpt inbuilt in the language itself but there are packages out there that implements this pattern.
Here is a nice article about this in python(All credits to the original author):
Dependency Injection in Python
Strategy Pattern: This is an anti-pattern to inheritance and is an example of composition which basically means instead of inheriting from a base class we pass the required class's object to the constructor of classes we want to have the functionality in. For example:
Suppose you want to have a common add() operation but it can be implemented in different ways(add two numbers or add two strings)
Class XYZ():
def __constructor__(adder):
self.adder = adder
The only condition being all adders passed to the XYZ class should have a common Interface.
Here is a more detailed example:
Strategy Pattern in Python
Interfaces:
Interfaces are the simplest, they define a set of common attributes and methods(with or without a default implementation). Any class then can implement an interface with its own functionality or some shared common functionality. In python Interfaces are implemented via abc package.

How to store a python function within an XML file

I'm developing a GUI application in Python that stores it's documents in an XML based format. The application is a mathematical model which several pre-defined components which can be drag-and-dropped. I'd also like the user to be able to create custom components by writing a python function inside an editor provided within the application. My issue is with storing these functions in the XML.
A function might look something like this:
def func(node, timestamp):
return node.weight * timestamp.day + 4
These functions are wrapped in an object which provides a standard way of calling them (compared to the pre-defined components). If I was to create one from Python directly it would look like this:
parameter = ParameterFunction(func)
The function is then called by the model like this:
parameter.value(node=node, timestamp=timestamp)
The ParameterFunction object has a to_xml and from_xml functions which need to serialise/deserialise the object to/from an XML representation.
My question is: how do I store the Python functions in an XML document?
One solution I have thought of so far is to store the function definition as a string, eval() or exec() it for use but keep the string, then store the string in a CDATA block in the XML. Are there any issues with this that I'm not seeing?
An alternative would be to store all of the Python code in a separate file, and have the XML reference just the function names. This could be nice as it could be edited easily in an external editor. In which case what is the best way to import the code? I am envisiging fighting with the python import path...
I'm aware there are will be security concerns with running untrusted code, but I'm willing to make this tradeoff for the freedom it gives users.
The specific application I'm referring to is on github. I'm happy to provide more information if it's needed, but I've tried to keep it fairly generic here. https://github.com/snorfalorpagus/pywr/blob/120928eaacb9206701ceb9bc91a5d73740db1953/pywr/core.py#L396-L402

Nope, you have the easiest and best solution that I can think of. Just keep them as strings, as long as your not worried about running the untrusted code.
The way I'd deal with external python scripts containing tiny snippets like yours would be to treat them as plain text files and read them in as strings. This avoids all the problems with importing them. Just read them in and call exec on them, then the functions will exist in scope.
EDIT: I was going to add something on sandboxing python code, but after a bit of research it seems this will not be an easy task, it would be easier to sandbox the entire program. Another longer and harder way to restrict the untrusted code would be to create your own tiny interpreter that only did safe operations (i.e mathematical operations, calling existing functions, etc..)

Setting and getting "data" from PyQt widget items?

This is not so much a question as it is a request for an explanation. I'm following Mark Summerfield's "Rapid GUI Programming with Python and Qt", and I must've missed something because I cannot make sense of the following mechanism to link together a real "instance_item" which I am using and is full of various types of data, and a "widget_item" which represents it in a QTreeWidget model for convenience.
Setting:
widget_item.setData(0, Qt.UserRole, QVariant(long(id(instance_item))))
Getting
widget_item.data(0, Qt.UserRole).toLongLong()[0]
Stuff like toLongLong() doesn't seem "Pythonic" at all, and why are we invoking Qt.UserRole and QVariant? are the "setData" and "data" functions part of the Qt framework or is it a more general Python command?

There are at least 2 better solutions. In order of increasing pythonicity:
1) You don't need quite so much data type packing
widget_item.setData(0, Qt.UserRole, QVariant(instance_item))
widget_item.data(0, Qt.UserRole).toPyObject()
2) There is an alternate API to PyQt4 where QVariant is done away with, and the conversion to-from QVariant happens transparently. To enable it, you need to add the following lines before any PyQt4 import statements:
import sip
sip.setapi('QVariant', 2)
Then, your code looks like this:
widget_item.setData(0, Qt.UserRole, instance_item)
widget_item.data(0, Qt.UserRole) # original python object
Note that there is also an option sip.setapi('QString', 2) where QString is done away with, and you can use unicode instead.

All of these methods -- setData(), data(), toLongLong() are all part of Qt and were originally intended to be used in C++, where they make a lot more sense. I'm not really sure what the author is trying to do here, but if you find yourself doing something terribly un-pythonic, there is probably a better way:
## The setter:
widget_item.instance_item = instance_item
## The getter:
instance_item = widget_item.instance_item
The Qt docs can't recommend this, of course, because there are no dynamic attribute assignments in C++. There are a few very specific instances when you may have to deal with QVariant and other such nonsense (for example, when dealing with databases via QtSQL), but they are quite rare.

Python: add a parent class to a class after initial evaluation

General Python Question
I'm importing a Python library (call it animals.py) with the following class structure:
class Animal(object): pass
class Rat(Animal): pass
class Bat(Animal): pass
class Cat(Animal): pass
...
I want to add a parent class (Pet) to each of the species classes (Rat, Bat, Cat, ...); however, I cannot change the actual source of the library I'm importing, so it has to be a run time change.
The following seems to work:
import animals
class Pet(object): pass
for klass in (animals.Rat, animals.Bat, animals.Cat, ...):
klass.__bases__ = (Pet,) + klass.__bases__
Is this the best way to inject a parent class into an inheritance tree in Python without making modification to the source definition of the class to be modified?
Motivating Circumstances
I'm trying to graft persistence onto the a large library that controls lab equipment. Messing with it is out of the question. I want to give ZODB's Persistent a try. I don't want to write the mixin/facade wrapper library because I'm dealing with 100+ classes and lots of imports in my application code that would need to be updated. I'm testing options by hacking on my entry point only: setting up the DB, patching as shown above (but pulling the species classes w/ introspection on the animals module instead of explicit listing) then closing out the DB as I exit.
Mea Culpa / Request
This is an intentionally general question. I'm interested in different approaches to injecting a parent and comments on the pros and cons of those approaches. I agree that this sort of runtime chicanery would make for really confusing code. If I settle on ZODB I'll do something explicit. For now, as a regular user of python, I'm curious about the general case.

Your method is pretty much how to do it dynamically. The real question is: What does this new parent class add? If you are trying to insert your own methods in a method chain that exists in the classes already there, and they were not written properly, you won't be able to; if you are adding original methods (e.g. an interface layer), then you could possibly just use functions instead.
I am one who embraces Python's dynamic nature, and would have no problem using the code you have presented. Make sure you have good unit tests in place (dynamic or not ;), and that modifying the inheritance tree actually lets you do what you need, and enjoy Python!

You should try really hard not to do this. It is strange, and will likely end in tears.
As #agf mentions, you can use Pet as a mixin. If you tell us more about why you want to insert a parent class, we can help you find a nicer solution.

Implementing a macro recorder for a python gui?

I'm wondering how to go about implementing a macro recorder for a python gui (probably PyQt, but ideally agnostic). Something much like in Excel but instead of getting VB macros, it would create python code. Previously I made something for Tkinter where all callbacks pass through a single class that logged actions. Unfortunately my class doing the logging was a bit ugly and I'm looking for a nicer one. While this did make a nice separation of the gui from the rest of the code, it seems to be unusual in terms of the usual signals/slots wiring. Is there a better way?
The intention is that a user can work their way through a data analysis procedure in a graphical interface, seeing the effect of their decisions. Later the recorded procedure could be applied to other data with minor modification and without needing the start up the gui.

You could apply the command design pattern: when your user executes an action, generate a command that represents the changes required. You then implement some sort of command pipeline that executes the commands themselves, most likely just calling the methods you already have. Once the commands are executed, you can serialize them or take note of them the way you want and load the series of commands when you need to re-execute the procedure.

Thinking in high level, this is what I'd do:
Develop a decorator function, with which I'd decorate every event-handling functions.
This decorator functions would take note of thee function called, and its parameters (and possibly returning values) in a unified data-structure - taking care, on this data structure, to mark Widget and Control instances as a special type of object. That is because in other runs these widgets won't be the same instances - ah, you can't even serialize a toolkit widget instances, be it Qt or otherwise.
When the time comes to play a macro, you fill-in the gaps replacing the widget-representating object with the instances of the actually running objects, and simply call the original functions with the remaining parameters.
In toolkits that have an specialized "event" parameter that is passed down to event-handling functions, you will have to take care of serializing and de-serializing this event as well.
I hope this can help. I could come up with some proof of concept code for that (although I am in a mood to use tkinter today - would have to read a lot to come up with a Qt4 example).

An example of what you're looking for is in mayavi2. For your purposes, mayavi2's "script record" functionality will generate a Python script that can then be trivially modified for other cases. I hear that it works pretty well.