Okay, I want to use repr() to print out a text version of a bunch of lists and nested arrays.
But I want the numbers to have only 4 decimal places not: 42.7635745114 but 32.7635.
I'd like to use repr() because of its nice ability to handle nested arrays. Writing my own print loop is an unattractive option.
Surely there is some way to overload repr to do this? I see there is a repr and reprlib modules but examples are really scarce, like nonexistent.
No, there is no way to overload repr(). The format for floats is hardcoded in the C source code.
The float_repr() function calls a helper function with the 'r' formatter, which eventually calls a utility function that hardcodes the format to what comes down to format(float, '.16g').
You could subclass float, but to only do that for representing values (especially in a larger structure) is overkill. This is where repr (reprlib in Python 3) comes in; that library is designed to print useful representations of arbitrary data structures, and letting you hook into printing specific types in that structure.
You could use the repr module by subclassing repr.Repr(), providing a repr_float() method to handle floats:
try: # Python 3
import reprlib
except ImportError: # Python 2
import repr as reprlib
class FloatRepr(reprlib.Repr):
def repr_float(self, value, level):
return format(value, '.4f')
print(FloatRepr().repr(object_to_represent))
Demo:
>>> import random
>>> import reprlib
>>> class FloatRepr(reprlib.Repr):
... def repr_float(self, value, level):
... return format(value, '.4f')
...
>>> print(FloatRepr().repr([random.random() for _ in range(5)]))
[0.5613, 0.9042, 0.3891, 0.7396, 0.0140]
You may want to set the max* attributes on your subclass to influence how many values are printed per container type.
Maybe you could try string formatting using return "%.4f" %(self.float):
>>> class obj:
... def __init__(self, value):
... self.float = value
... def __repr__(self):
... return "%.4f" %(self.float)
...
>>> x = obj(8.1231231253252)
>>> x.float
8.1231231253252
>>> x
8.1231
>>>
Related
This question already has answers here:
How to print instances of a class using print()?
(12 answers)
Closed 7 months ago.
Well this interactive python console snippet will tell everything:
>>> class Test:
... def __str__(self):
... return 'asd'
...
>>> t = Test()
>>> print(t)
asd
>>> l = [Test(), Test(), Test()]
>>> print(l)
[__main__.Test instance at 0x00CBC1E8, __main__.Test instance at 0x00CBC260,
__main__.Test instance at 0x00CBC238]
Basically I would like to get three asd string printed when I print the list. I have also tried pprint but it gives the same results.
Try:
class Test:
def __repr__(self):
return 'asd'
And read this documentation link:
The suggestion in other answers to implement __repr__ is definitely one possibility. If that's unfeasible for whatever reason (existing type, __repr__ needed for reasons other than aesthetic, etc), then just do
print [str(x) for x in l]
or, as some are sure to suggest, map(str, l) (just a bit more compact).
You need to make a __repr__ method:
>>> class Test:
def __str__(self):
return 'asd'
def __repr__(self):
return 'zxcv'
>>> [Test(), Test()]
[zxcv, zxcv]
>>> print _
[zxcv, zxcv]
Refer to the docs:
object.__repr__(self)
Called by the repr() built-in function and by string conversions (reverse quotes) to compute the “official” string representation of an object. If at all possible, this should look like a valid Python expression that could be used to recreate an object with the same value (given an appropriate environment). If this is not possible, a string of the form <...some useful description...> should be returned. The return value must be a string object. If a class defines __repr__() but not __str__(), then __repr__() is also used when an “informal” string representation of instances of that class is required.
This is typically used for debugging, so it is important that the representation is information-rich and unambiguous.
In python we have conversion specifier like
'{0!s}'.format(10)
which prints
'10'
How can I make my own conversion specifiers like
'{0!d}'.format(4561321)
which print integers in following format
4,561,321
Or converts it into binary like
'{0!b}'.format(2)
which prints
10
What are the classes I need to inherit and which functions I need to modify? If possible please provide a small example.
Thanks!!
What you want to do is impossible, because built-in types cannot be modified and literals always refer to built-in types.
There is a special method to handle the formatting of values, that is __format__, however it only handles the format string, not the conversion specifier, i.e. you can customize how {0:d} is handled but not how {0!d} is. The only things that work with ! are s and r.
Note that d and b already exist as format specifiers:
>>> '{0:b}'.format(2)
'10'
In any case you could implement your own class that handles formatting:
class MyInt:
def __init__(self, value):
self.value = value
def __format__(self, fmt):
if fmt == 'd':
text = list(str(self.value))
elif fmt == 'b':
text = list(bin(self.value)[2:])
for i in range(len(text)-3, 0, -3):
text.insert(i, ',')
return ''.join(text)
Used as:
>>> '{0:d}'.format(MyInt(5000000))
5,000,000
>>> '{0:b}'.format(MyInt(8))
1,000
Try not to make your own and try to use default functions already present in python. You can use,
'{0:b}'.format(2) # for binary
'{0:d}'.format(2) # for integer
'{0:x}'.format(2) # for hexadecimal
'{0:f}'.format(2) # for float
'{0:e}'.format(2) # for exponential
Please refer https://docs.python.org/2/library/string.html#formatspec for more.
This question already has answers here:
Purpose of __repr__ method?
(6 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I am trying to learn python with my own and i stucked at __repr__ function. Though i have read lots of post on __repr__ along with the python document. so i have decided to ask this Question here. The code bellow explains my confusion.
class Point:
def __init__(self,x,y):
self.x, self.y = x,y
def __repr__(self):
return 'Point(x=%s, y=%s)'%(self.x, self.y)
def print_class(self):
return 'Point(x=%s, y=%s)'%(self.x, self.y)
p = Point(1,2)
print p
print p.print_class()
Point(x=1, y=2)
Point(x=1, y=2)
If a normal function can also perform similar task then what is the extra advantage of __repr__ over print_class() (in my case a normal function) function.
The __repr__ function is called by repr() internally. repr() is called when you are printing the object directly , and the class does not define a __str__() . From documentation -
object.__repr__(self)
Called by the repr() built-in function and by string conversions (reverse quotes) to compute the “official” string representation of an object. If at all possible, this should look like a valid Python expression that could be used to recreate an object with the same value (given an appropriate environment). If this is not possible, a string of the form <...some useful description...> should be returned. The return value must be a string object. If a class defines __repr__() but not __str__(), then __repr__() is also used when an “informal” string representation of instances of that class is required.
In your case for print_class() , you have to specifically call the method when printing the object. But in case of __repr__() , it gets internally called by print .
This is especially useful, when you are mixing different classes/types . For Example lets take a list which can have numbers and objects of your point class, now you want to print the elements of the list.
If you do not define the __repr__() or __str__() , you would have to first check the instance , whether its of type Point if so call print_class() , or if not directly print the number.
But when your class defines the __repr__() or __str__() , you can just directly call print on all the elements of the list, print statement would internally take care of printing the correct values.
Example , Lets assume a class which has print_class() method, but no __repr__() or __str__() , code -
>>> class CA:
... def __init__(self,x):
... self.x = x
... def print_class(self):
... return self.x
...
>>> l = [1,2,3,CA(4),CA(5)]
>>> for i in l:
... print(i)
...
1
2
3
<__main__.CA object at 0x00590F10>
<__main__.CA object at 0x005A5070>
SyntaxError: invalid syntax
>>> for i in l:
... if isinstance(i, CA):
... print(i.print_class())
... else:
... print(i)
...
1
2
3
4
5
As you can see, when we mix numbers and objects of type CA in the list, and then when we just did print(i) , it did not print what we wanted. For this to work correctly, we had to check the type of i and call the appropriate method (as done in second case).
Now lets assume a class that implements __repr__() instead of print_class() -
>>> class CA:
... def __init__(self,x):
... self.x = x
... def __repr__(self):
... return str(self.x)
...
>>>
>>> l = [1,2,3,CA(4),CA(5)]
>>> for i in l:
... print(i)
...
1
2
3
4
5
As you can see in second case, simply printing worked, since print internally calls __str__() first, and as that did not exist fell back to __repr__() .
And not just this, when we do str(list) , internally each list's element's __repr__() is called. Example -
First case (without __repr__() ) -
>>> str(l)
'[1, 2, 3, <__main__.CA object at 0x005AB3D0>, <__main__.CA object at 0x005AB410>]'
Second case (with __repr__() ) -
>>> str(l)
'[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]'
Also, in interactive interpreter, when you are directly using the object, it shows you the output of repr() function, Example -
>>> class CA:
... def __repr__(self):
... return "CA instance"
...
>>>
>>> c = CA()
>>> c
CA instance
The difference is that the __repr__ function is automatically called by Python in certain contexts, and is part of a predefined API with specific requirements. For instance, if you enter p by itself(not print p) in the interactive shell after creating your p object, its __repr__ will be called. It will also be used for print p if you don't define a __str__on p. (That is, you had to write print p.print_class(), but you didn't have to write print p.__repr__(); Python called __repr__ automatically for you.) The requirements for __repr__ are described in the documentation:
Called by the repr() built-in function and by string conversions (reverse quotes) to compute the “official” string representation of an object. If at all possible, this should look like a valid Python expression that could be used to recreate an object with the same value (given an appropriate environment). If this is not possible, a string of the form <...some useful description...> should be returned.
In short, if you write your own method called print_class you can make it do whatever you want and tell people how to use it, because it's your API. If you use __repr__ you're supposed to follow the conventions of Python's API. Either one may make sense depending on the context.
It helps you do more efficient coding work. even though you get same result using user define method like 'print_class()' as repr, but you don't need to type in '.print_class()' by repr method.
Can magic methods be overridden outside of a class?
When I do something like this
def __int__(x):
return x + 5
a = 5
print(int(a))
it prints '5' instead of '10'. Do I do something wrong or magic methods just can't be overridden outside of a class?
Short answer; not really.
You cannot arbitrarily change the behaviour of int() a builtin function (*which internally calls __int__()) on arbitrary builtin types such as int(s).
You can however change the behaviour of custom objects like this:
Example:
class Foo(object):
def __init__(self, value):
self.value = value
def __add__(self, other):
self.value += other
def __repr__(self):
return "<Foo(value={0:d})>".format(self.value)
Demo:
>>> x = Foo(5)
>>> x + 5
>>> x
<Foo(value=10)>
This overrides two things here and implements two special methods:
__repr__() which get called by repr()
__add__() which get called by the + operator.
Update: As per the comments above; techincally you can redefine the builtin function int; Example:
def int(x):
return x + 5
int(5) # returns 10
However this is not recommended and does not change the overall behaviour of the object x.
Update #2: The reason you cannot change the behaviour of bultin types (without modifying the underlying source or using Cuthon or ctypes) is because builtin types in Python are not exposed or mutable to the user unlike Homoiconic Languages (See: Homoiconicity). -- Even then I'm not really sure you can with Cython/ctypes; but the reason question is "Why do you want to do this?"
Update #3: See Python's documentation on Data Model (object.__complex__ for example).
You can redefine a top-level __int__ function, but nobody ever calls that.
As implied in the Data Model documentation, when you write int(x), that calls x.__int__(), not __int__(x).
And even that isn't really true. First, __int__ is a special method, meaning it's allowed to call type(x).__int__(x) rather than x.__int__(), but that doesn't matter here. Second, it's not required to call __int__ unless you give it something that isn't already an int (and call it with the one-argument form). So, it could be as if it's was written like this:
def int(x, base=None):
if base is not None:
return do_basey_stuff(x, base)
if isinstance(x, int):
return x
return type(x).__int__(x)
So, there is no way to change what int(5) will do… short of just shadowing the builtin int function with a different builtin/global/local function of the same name, of course.
But what if you wanted to, say, change int(5.5)? That's not an int, so it's going to call float.__int__(5.5). So, all we have to do is monkeypatch that, right?
Well, yes, except that Python allows builtin types to be immutable, and most of the builtin types in CPython are. So, if you try it:
>>> _real_float_int = float.__int__
>>> def _float_int(self):
... return _real_float_int(self) + 5
>>> _float_int(5.5)
10
>>> float.__int__ = _float_int
TypeError: can't set attributes of built-in/extension type 'float'
However, if you're defining your own types, that's a different story:
>>> class MyFloat(float):
... def __int__(self):
... return super().__int__() + 5
>>> f = MyFloat(5.5)
>>> int(f)
10
This is a bit of a silly thing, but I want to know if there is concise way in Python to define class variables that contain string representations of their own names. For example, one can define:
class foo(object):
bar = 'bar'
baz = 'baz'
baf = 'baf'
Probably a more concise way to write it in terms of lines consumed is:
class foo(object):
bar, baz, baf = 'bar', 'baz', 'baf'
Even there, though, I still have to type each identifier twice, once on each side of the assignment, and the opportunity for typos is rife.
What I want is something like what sympy provides in its var method:
sympy.var('a,b,c')
The above injects into the namespace the variables a, b, and c, defined as the corresponding sympy symbolic variables.
Is there something comparable that would do this for plain strings?
class foo(object):
[nifty thing]('bar', 'baz', 'baf')
EDIT: To note, I want to be able to access these as separate identifiers in code that uses foo:
>>> f = foo(); print(f.bar)
bar
ADDENDUM: Given the interest in the question, I thought I'd provide more context on why I want to do this. I have two use-cases at present: (1) typecodes for a set of custom exceptions (each Exception subclass has a distinct typecode set); and (2) lightweight enum. My desired feature set is:
Only having to type the typecode / enum name (or value) once in the source definition. class foo(object): bar = 'bar' works fine but means I have to type it out twice in-source, which gets annoying for longer names and exposes a typo risk.
Valid typecodes / enum values exposed for IDE autocomplete.
Values stored internally as comprehensible strings:
For the Exception subclasses, I want to be able to define myError.__str__ as just something like return self.typecode + ": " + self.message + " (" + self.source + ")", without having to do a whole lot of dict-fu to back-reference an int value of self.typecode to a comprehensible and meaningful string.
For the enums, I want to just be able to obtain widget as output from e = myEnum.widget; print(e), again without a lot of dict-fu.
I recognize this will increase overhead. My application is not speed-sensitive (GUI-based tool for driving a separate program), so I don't think this will matter at all.
Straightforward membership testing, by also including (say) a frozenset containing all of the typecodes / enum string values as myError.typecodes/myEnum.E classes. This addresses potential problems from accidental (or intentional.. but why?!) use of an invalid typecode / enum string via simple sanity checks like if not enumVal in myEnum.E: raise(ValueError('Invalid enum value: ' + str(enumVal))).
Ability to import individual enum / exception subclasses via, say, from errmodule import squirrelerror, to avoid cluttering the namespace of the usage environment with non-relevant exception subclasses. I believe this prohibits any solutions requiring post-twiddling on the module level like what Sinux proposed.
For the enum use case, I would rather avoid introducing an additional package dependency since I don't (think I) care about any extra functionality available in the official enum class. In any event, it still wouldn't resolve #1.
I've already figured out implementation I'm satisfied with for all of the above but #1. My interest in a solution to #1 (without breaking the others) is partly a desire to typo-proof entry of the typecode / enum values into source, and partly plain ol' laziness. (Says the guy who just typed up a gigantic SO question on the topic.)
I recommend using collections.namedtuple:
Example:
>>> from collections import namedtuple as nifty_thing
>>> Data = nifty_thing("Data", ["foo", "bar", "baz"])
>>> data = Data(foo=1, bar=2, baz=3)
>>> data.foo
1
>>> data.bar
2
>>> data.baz
3
Side Note: If you are using/on Python 3.x I'd recommend Enum as per #user2357112's comment. This is the standardized approach going forward for Python 3+
Update: Okay so if I understand the OP's exact requirement(s) here I think the only way to do this (and presumably sympy does this too) is to inject the names/variables into the globals() or locals() namespaces. Example:
#!/usr/bin/env python
def nifty_thing(*names):
d = globals()
for name in names:
d[name] = None
nifty_thing("foo", "bar", "baz")
print foo, bar, bar
Output:
$ python foo.py
None None None
NB: I don't really recommend this! :)
Update #2: The other example you showed in your question is implemented like this:
#!/usr/bin/env python
import sys
def nifty_thing(*names):
frame = sys._getframe(1)
locals = frame.f_locals
for name in names:
locals[name] = None
class foo(object):
nifty_thing("foo", "bar", "baz")
f = foo()
print f.foo, f.bar, f.bar
Output:
$ python foo.py
None None None
NB: This is inspired by zope.interface.implements().
current_list = ['bar', 'baz', 'baf']
class foo(object):
"""to be added"""
for i in current_list:
setattr(foo, i, i)
then run this:
>>>f = foo()
>>>print(f.bar)
bar
>>>print(f.baz)
baz
This doesn't work exactly like what you asked for, but it seems like it should do the job:
class AutoNamespace(object):
def __init__(self, names):
try:
# Support space-separated name strings
names = names.split()
except AttributeError:
pass
for name in names:
setattr(self, name, name)
Demo:
>>> x = AutoNamespace('a b c')
>>> x.a
'a'
If you want to do what SymPy does with var, you can, but I would strongly recommend against it. That said, here's a function based on the source code of sympy.var:
def var(names):
from inspect import currentframe
frame = currentframe().f_back
try:
names = names.split()
except AttributeError:
pass
for name in names:
frame.f_globals[name] = name
Demo:
>>> var('foo bar baz')
>>> bar
'bar'
It'll always create global variables, even if you call it from inside a function or class. inspect is used to get at the caller's globals, whereas globals() would get var's own globals.
How about you define the variable as emtpy string and then get their name:
class foo(object):
def __getitem__(self, item):
return item
foo = foo()
print foo['test']
Here's an extension of bman's idea. This has its advantages and disadvantages, but at least it does work with some autocompleters.
class FooMeta(type):
def __getattr__(self, attr):
return attr
def __dir__(self):
return ['bar', 'baz', 'baf']
class foo:
__metaclass__ = FooMeta
This allows access like foo.xxx → 'xxx' for all xxx, but also guides autocomplete through __dir__.
Figured out what I was looking for:
>>> class tester:
... E = frozenset(['this', 'that', 'the', 'other'])
... for s in E:
... exec(str(s) + "='" + str(s) + "'") # <--- THIS
...
>>> tester()
<__main__.tester instance at 0x03018BE8>
>>> t = tester()
>>> t.this
'this'
>>> t.that in tester.E
True
Only have to define the element strings once, and I'm pretty sure it will work for all of my requirements listed in the question. In actual implementation, I plan to encapsulate the str(s) + "='" + str(s) + "'" in a helper function, so that I can just call exec(helper(s)) in the for loop. (I'm pretty sure that the exec has to be placed in the body of the class, not in the helper function, or else the new variables would be injected into the (transitory) scope of the helper function, not that of the class.)
EDIT: Upon detailed testing, this DOES NOT WORK -- the use of exec prevents the introspection of the IDE from knowing of the existence of the created variables.
I think you can achieve a rather beautiful solution using metaclasses, but I'm not fluent enough in using those to present that as an answer, but I do have an option which seems to work rather nicely:
def new_enum(name, *class_members):
"""Builds a class <name> with <class_members> having the name as value."""
return type(name, (object, ), { val : val for val in class_members })
Foo = new_enum('Foo', 'bar', 'baz', 'baf')
This should recreate the class you've given as example, and if you want you can change the inheritance by changing the second parameter of the call to class type(name, bases, dict).