Related
Is there a magic method that can overload the assignment operator, like __assign__(self, new_value)?
I'd like to forbid a re-bind for an instance:
class Protect():
def __assign__(self, value):
raise Exception("This is an ex-parrot")
var = Protect() # once assigned...
var = 1 # this should raise Exception()
Is it possible? Is it insane? Should I be on medicine?
The way you describe it is absolutely not possible. Assignment to a name is a fundamental feature of Python and no hooks have been provided to change its behavior.
However, assignment to a member in a class instance can be controlled as you want, by overriding .__setattr__().
class MyClass(object):
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
self._locked = True
def __setattr__(self, name, value):
if self.__dict__.get("_locked", False) and name == "x":
raise AttributeError("MyClass does not allow assignment to .x member")
self.__dict__[name] = value
>>> m = MyClass(3)
>>> m.x
3
>>> m.x = 4
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "<stdin>", line 7, in __setattr__
AttributeError: MyClass does not allow assignment to .x member
Note that there is a member variable, _locked, that controls whether the assignment is permitted. You can unlock it to update the value.
No, as assignment is a language intrinsic which doesn't have a modification hook.
I don't think it's possible. The way I see it, assignment to a variable doesn't do anything to the object it previously referred to: it's just that the variable "points" to a different object now.
In [3]: class My():
...: def __init__(self, id):
...: self.id=id
...:
In [4]: a = My(1)
In [5]: b = a
In [6]: a = 1
In [7]: b
Out[7]: <__main__.My instance at 0xb689d14c>
In [8]: b.id
Out[8]: 1 # the object is unchanged!
However, you can mimic the desired behavior by creating a wrapper object with __setitem__() or __setattr__() methods that raise an exception, and keep the "unchangeable" stuff inside.
Inside a module, this is absolutely possible, via a bit of dark magic.
import sys
tst = sys.modules['tst']
class Protect():
def __assign__(self, value):
raise Exception("This is an ex-parrot")
var = Protect() # once assigned...
Module = type(tst)
class ProtectedModule(Module):
def __setattr__(self, attr, val):
exists = getattr(self, attr, None)
if exists is not None and hasattr(exists, '__assign__'):
exists.__assign__(val)
super().__setattr__(attr, val)
tst.__class__ = ProtectedModule
The above example assumes the code resides in a module named tst. You can do this in the repl by changing tst to __main__.
If you want to protect access through the local module, make all writes to it through tst.var = newval.
Using the top-level namespace, this is impossible. When you run
var = 1
It stores the key var and the value 1 in the global dictionary. It is roughly equivalent to calling globals().__setitem__('var', 1). The problem is that you cannot replace the global dictionary in a running script (you probably can by messing with the stack, but that is not a good idea). However you can execute code in a secondary namespace, and provide a custom dictionary for its globals.
class myglobals(dict):
def __setitem__(self, key, value):
if key=='val':
raise TypeError()
dict.__setitem__(self, key, value)
myg = myglobals()
dict.__setitem__(myg, 'val', 'protected')
import code
code.InteractiveConsole(locals=myg).interact()
That will fire up a REPL which almost operates normally, but refuses any attempts to set the variable val. You could also use execfile(filename, myg). Note this doesn't protect against malicious code.
I will burn in Python hell, but what's life without a little fun.
Important disclaimers:
I only provide this example for fun
I'm 100% sure I don't understand this well
It might not even be safe to do this, in any sense
I don't think this is practical
I don't think this is a good idea
I don't even want to seriously try to implement this
This doesn't work for jupyter (probably ipython too)*
Maybe you can't overload assignment, but you can (at least with Python ~3.9) achieve what you want even at the top-level namespace. It will be hard doing it "properly" for all cases, but here's a small example by hacking audithooks:
import sys
import ast
import inspect
import dis
import types
def hook(name, tup):
if name == "exec" and tup:
if tup and isinstance(tup[0], types.CodeType):
# Probably only works for my example
code = tup[0]
# We want to parse that code and find if it "stores" a variable.
# The ops for the example code would look something like this:
# ['LOAD_CONST', '<0>', 'STORE_NAME', '<0>',
# 'LOAD_CONST', 'POP_TOP', 'RETURN_VALUE', '<0>']
store_instruction_arg = None
instructions = [dis.opname[op] for op in code.co_code]
# Track the index so we can find the '<NUM>' index into the names
for i, instruction in enumerate(instructions):
# You might need to implement more logic here
# or catch more cases
if instruction == "STORE_NAME":
# store_instruction_arg in our case is 0.
# This might be the wrong way to parse get this value,
# but oh well.
store_instruction_arg = code.co_code[i + 1]
break
if store_instruction_arg is not None:
# code.co_names here is: ('a',)
var_name = code.co_names[store_instruction_arg]
# Check if the variable name has been previously defined.
# Will this work inside a function? a class? another
# module? Well... :D
if var_name in globals():
raise Exception("Cannot re-assign variable")
# Magic
sys.addaudithook(hook)
And here's the example:
>>> a = "123"
>>> a = 123
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 21, in hook
Exception: Cannot re-assign variable
>>> a
'123'
*For Jupyter I found another way that looked a tiny bit cleaner because I parsed the AST instead of the code object:
import sys
import ast
def hook(name, tup):
if name == "compile" and tup:
ast_mod = tup[0]
if isinstance(ast_mod, ast.Module):
assign_token = None
for token in ast_mod.body:
if isinstance(token, ast.Assign):
target, value = token.targets[0], token.value
var_name = target.id
if var_name in globals():
raise Exception("Can't re-assign variable")
sys.addaudithook(hook)
No there isn't
Think about it, in your example you are rebinding the name var to a new value.
You aren't actually touching the instance of Protect.
If the name you wish to rebind is in fact a property of some other entity i.e
myobj.var then you can prevent assigning a value to the property/attribute of the entity.
But I assume thats not what you want from your example.
Yes, It's possible, you can handle __assign__ via modify ast.
pip install assign
Test with:
class T():
def __assign__(self, v):
print('called with %s' % v)
b = T()
c = b
You will get
>>> import magic
>>> import test
called with c
The project is at https://github.com/RyanKung/assign
And the simpler gist: https://gist.github.com/RyanKung/4830d6c8474e6bcefa4edd13f122b4df
Generally, the best approach I found is overriding __ilshift__ as a setter and __rlshift__ as a getter, being duplicated by the property decorator.
It is almost the last operator being resolved just (| & ^) and logical are lower.
It is rarely used (__lrshift__ is less, but it can be taken to account).
Within using of PyPi assign package only forward assignment can be controlled, so actual 'strength' of the operator is lower.
PyPi assign package example:
class Test:
def __init__(self, val, name):
self._val = val
self._name = name
self.named = False
def __assign__(self, other):
if hasattr(other, 'val'):
other = other.val
self.set(other)
return self
def __rassign__(self, other):
return self.get()
def set(self, val):
self._val = val
def get(self):
if self.named:
return self._name
return self._val
#property
def val(self):
return self._val
x = Test(1, 'x')
y = Test(2, 'y')
print('x.val =', x.val)
print('y.val =', y.val)
x = y
print('x.val =', x.val)
z: int = None
z = x
print('z =', z)
x = 3
y = x
print('y.val =', y.val)
y.val = 4
output:
x.val = 1
y.val = 2
x.val = 2
z = <__main__.Test object at 0x0000029209DFD978>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "E:\packages\pyksp\pyksp\compiler2\simple_test2.py", line 44, in <module>
print('y.val =', y.val)
AttributeError: 'int' object has no attribute 'val'
The same with shift:
class Test:
def __init__(self, val, name):
self._val = val
self._name = name
self.named = False
def __ilshift__(self, other):
if hasattr(other, 'val'):
other = other.val
self.set(other)
return self
def __rlshift__(self, other):
return self.get()
def set(self, val):
self._val = val
def get(self):
if self.named:
return self._name
return self._val
#property
def val(self):
return self._val
x = Test(1, 'x')
y = Test(2, 'y')
print('x.val =', x.val)
print('y.val =', y.val)
x <<= y
print('x.val =', x.val)
z: int = None
z <<= x
print('z =', z)
x <<= 3
y <<= x
print('y.val =', y.val)
y.val = 4
output:
x.val = 1
y.val = 2
x.val = 2
z = 2
y.val = 3
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "E:\packages\pyksp\pyksp\compiler2\simple_test.py", line 45, in <module>
y.val = 4
AttributeError: can't set attribute
So <<= operator within getting value at a property is the much more visually clean solution and it is not attempting user to make some reflective mistakes like:
var1.val = 1
var2.val = 2
# if we have to check type of input
var1.val = var2
# but it could be accendently typed worse,
# skipping the type-check:
var1.val = var2.val
# or much more worse:
somevar = var1 + var2
var1 += var2
# sic!
var1 = var2
In the global namespace this is not possible, but you could take advantage of more advanced Python metaprogramming to prevent multiple instances of a the Protect object from being created. The Singleton pattern is good example of this.
In the case of a Singleton you would ensure that once instantiated, even if the original variable referencing the instance is reassigned, that the object would persist. Any subsequent instances would just return a reference to the same object.
Despite this pattern, you would never be able to prevent a global variable name itself from being reassigned.
As mentioned by other people, there is no way to do it directly. It can be overridden for class members though, which is good for many cases.
As Ryan Kung mentioned, the AST of a package can be instrumented so that all assignments can have a side effect if the class assigned implements specific method(s). Building on his work to handle object creation and attribute assignment cases, the modified code and a full description is available here:
https://github.com/patgolez10/assignhooks
The package can be installed as: pip3 install assignhooks
Example <testmod.py>:
class SampleClass():
name = None
def __assignpre__(self, lhs_name, rhs_name, rhs):
print('PRE: assigning %s = %s' % (lhs_name, rhs_name))
# modify rhs if needed before assignment
if rhs.name is None:
rhs.name = lhs_name
return rhs
def __assignpost__(self, lhs_name, rhs_name):
print('POST: lhs', self)
print('POST: assigning %s = %s' % (lhs_name, rhs_name))
def myfunc():
b = SampleClass()
c = b
print('b.name', b.name)
to instrument it, e.g. <test.py>
import assignhooks
assignhooks.instrument.start() # instrument from now on
import testmod
assignhooks.instrument.stop() # stop instrumenting
# ... other imports and code bellow ...
testmod.myfunc()
Will produce:
$ python3 ./test.py
POST: lhs <testmod.SampleClass object at 0x1041dcc70>
POST: assigning b = SampleClass
PRE: assigning c = b
POST: lhs <testmod.SampleClass object at 0x1041dcc70>
POST: assigning c = b
b.name b
Beginning Python 3.8, it is possible to hint that a value is read-only using typing.Final. What this means is that nothing changes at runtime, allowing anyone to change the value, but if you're using any linter that can read type-hints then it's going to warn the user if they attempt to assign it.
from typing import Final
x: Final[int] = 3
x = 5 # Cannot assign to final name "x" (mypy)
This makes for way cleaner code, but it puts full trust in the user to respect it at runtime, making no attempt to stop users from changing values.
Another common pattern is to expose functions instead of module constants, like sys.getrecursionlimit and sys.setrecursionlimit.
def get_x() -> int:
return 3
Although users can do module.get_x = my_get_x, there's an obvious attempt on the user's part to break it, which can't be fixed. In this way we can prevent people from "accidentally" changing values in our module with minimal complexity.
A ugly solution is to reassign on destructor. But it's no real overload assignment.
import copy
global a
class MyClass():
def __init__(self):
a = 1000
# ...
def __del__(self):
a = copy.copy(self)
a = MyClass()
a = 1
Suppose I have two classes, one inheriting from the other :
class A():
def __init__(self):
pass
def doSomething(self):
print('It Works !') # Insert actual code here
class B(A):
pass
How do I make the doSomething method impossible to inherit, so that :
( I want to make the error happen )
>>> a = A()
>>> a.doSomething()
'It Works !'
>>> b = B()
>>> b.doSomething()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#132>", line 1, in <module>
b.doSomething()
AttributeError: 'B' object has no attribute 'doSomething'
To the best of my knowledge, there is no builtin way to do this in Python, because it is not really considered part of the Python philosophy. There can define "protected" and "private" methods in Python by prepending a single _ or double __, but you can still call those, it's just discouraged.
One very hacky way to achieve something similar might be to make the method itself "private" and have __getattr__ redirect to that method, but only if the object is really an A.
class A():
def __init__(self):
pass
def __doSomething(self):
print('It Works !')
def __getattr__(self, attr):
if attr == "doSomething":
if type(self) == A:
return self.__doSomething
else:
raise TypeError("Nope")
return super(A).__getattr__(self, attr)
But this could still be circumvented by calling the "private" method directly as _A__doSomething or overwriting __getattr__ in B.
Alternatively, possibly safer and probably simpler (but still pretty hacky IMHO), you could also add that check to doSomething itself.
def doSomething(self):
if type(self) != A:
raise TypeError("Nope")
print('It Works !')
You should question whether you want to have a non-inheritable part in the first place. It would be more typical to abstract out the common parts of A and B into a common parent, or use a mixin pattern.
class Parent
def doCommonThing1
def doCommonThing2
/ \
/ \
/ \
/ \
class A class B
def doSomething def doOtherThing
If you insist that B must be a subclass of A, then the only way to "uninherit" a method is to override it to do something else. For example, a property which raises attribute error is for all practical purposes the same as a missing attribute:
>>> class A:
... def doSomething(self):
... print("it works")
...
>>> class B(A):
... #property
... def doSomething(self):
... msg = "{!r} object has no attribute 'doSomething'"
... raise AttributeError(msg.format(type(self).__name__))
...
>>> A().doSomething()
it works
>>> hasattr(B(), "doSomething")
False
>>> B().doSomething()
...
AttributeError: 'B' object has no attribute 'doSomething'
Let's say I have an Entity class:
class Entity(dict):
pass
def save(self):
...
I can wrap a dict object with Entity(dict_obj)
But is it possible to create a class that can wrap any type of objects, eg. int, list etc.
PS I have come up the following work around, it doesn't work on the more complex objects, but seems to work with basic ones, completely unsure if there are any gotchas, might get penalised with efficiency by creating the class every time, please let me know:
class EntityMixin(object):
def save(self):
...
def get_entity(obj):
class Entity(obj.__class__, EntityMixin):
pass
return Entity(obj)
Usage:
>>> a = get_entity(1)
>>> a + 1
2
>>> b = get_entity('b')
>>> b.upper()
'B'
>>> c = get_entity([1,2])
>>> len(c)
2
>>> d = get_entity({'a':1})
>>> d['a']
1
>>> d = get_entity(map(lambda x : x, [1,2]))
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "/Users/jlin/projects/django-rest-framework-queryset/rest_framework_queryset/entity.py", line 11, in get_entity
return Entity(obj)
TypeError: map() must have at least two arguments.
Improve efficiency:
EntityClsCache = {}
class EntityMixin(object):
def save(self):
...
def _get_entity_cls(obj):
class Entity(obj.__class__, EntityMixin):
pass
return Entity
def get_entity(obj)
cls = None
try:
cls = EntityClsCache[obj.__class__]
except AttributeError:
cls = _get_entity_cls(obj)
EntityClsCache[obj.__class__] = cls
return cls(obj)
The solution you propose looks elegant, but it lacks caching, as in, you'll construct a unique class every time get_entity() is called, even if types are all the same.
Python has metaclasses, which act as class factories. Given that metaclass' methods override these of class, not the instance, we can implement class caching:
class EntityMixin(object):
pass
class CachingFactory(type):
__registry__ = {}
# Instead of declaring an inner class,
# we can also return type("Wrapper", (type_, EntityMixin), {}) right away,
# which, however, looks more obscure
def __makeclass(cls, type_):
class Wrapper(type_, EntityMixin):
pass
return Wrapper
# This is the simplest form of caching; for more realistic and less error-prone example,
# better use a more unique/complex key, for example, tuple of `value`'s ancestors --
# you can obtain them via type(value).__mro__
def __call__(cls, value):
t = type(value)
typename = t.__name__
if typename not in cls.__registry__:
cls.__registry__[typename] = cls.__makeclass(t)
return cls.__registry__[typename](value)
class Factory(object):
__metaclass__ = CachingFactory
This way, Factory(1) performs Factory.__call__(1), which is CachingFactory.__call__(1) (without metaclass, that'd be a constructor call instead, which would result in a class instance -- but we want to make a class first and only then instantiate it).
We can ensure that the objects created by Factory are the instances of the same class, which is crafted specifically for them at the first time:
>>> type(Factory(map(lambda x: x, [1, 2]))) is type(Factory([1]))
True
>>> type(Factory("a")) is type(Factory("abc"))
True
Is there a magic method that can overload the assignment operator, like __assign__(self, new_value)?
I'd like to forbid a re-bind for an instance:
class Protect():
def __assign__(self, value):
raise Exception("This is an ex-parrot")
var = Protect() # once assigned...
var = 1 # this should raise Exception()
Is it possible? Is it insane? Should I be on medicine?
The way you describe it is absolutely not possible. Assignment to a name is a fundamental feature of Python and no hooks have been provided to change its behavior.
However, assignment to a member in a class instance can be controlled as you want, by overriding .__setattr__().
class MyClass(object):
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
self._locked = True
def __setattr__(self, name, value):
if self.__dict__.get("_locked", False) and name == "x":
raise AttributeError("MyClass does not allow assignment to .x member")
self.__dict__[name] = value
>>> m = MyClass(3)
>>> m.x
3
>>> m.x = 4
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
File "<stdin>", line 7, in __setattr__
AttributeError: MyClass does not allow assignment to .x member
Note that there is a member variable, _locked, that controls whether the assignment is permitted. You can unlock it to update the value.
No, as assignment is a language intrinsic which doesn't have a modification hook.
I don't think it's possible. The way I see it, assignment to a variable doesn't do anything to the object it previously referred to: it's just that the variable "points" to a different object now.
In [3]: class My():
...: def __init__(self, id):
...: self.id=id
...:
In [4]: a = My(1)
In [5]: b = a
In [6]: a = 1
In [7]: b
Out[7]: <__main__.My instance at 0xb689d14c>
In [8]: b.id
Out[8]: 1 # the object is unchanged!
However, you can mimic the desired behavior by creating a wrapper object with __setitem__() or __setattr__() methods that raise an exception, and keep the "unchangeable" stuff inside.
Inside a module, this is absolutely possible, via a bit of dark magic.
import sys
tst = sys.modules['tst']
class Protect():
def __assign__(self, value):
raise Exception("This is an ex-parrot")
var = Protect() # once assigned...
Module = type(tst)
class ProtectedModule(Module):
def __setattr__(self, attr, val):
exists = getattr(self, attr, None)
if exists is not None and hasattr(exists, '__assign__'):
exists.__assign__(val)
super().__setattr__(attr, val)
tst.__class__ = ProtectedModule
The above example assumes the code resides in a module named tst. You can do this in the repl by changing tst to __main__.
If you want to protect access through the local module, make all writes to it through tst.var = newval.
Using the top-level namespace, this is impossible. When you run
var = 1
It stores the key var and the value 1 in the global dictionary. It is roughly equivalent to calling globals().__setitem__('var', 1). The problem is that you cannot replace the global dictionary in a running script (you probably can by messing with the stack, but that is not a good idea). However you can execute code in a secondary namespace, and provide a custom dictionary for its globals.
class myglobals(dict):
def __setitem__(self, key, value):
if key=='val':
raise TypeError()
dict.__setitem__(self, key, value)
myg = myglobals()
dict.__setitem__(myg, 'val', 'protected')
import code
code.InteractiveConsole(locals=myg).interact()
That will fire up a REPL which almost operates normally, but refuses any attempts to set the variable val. You could also use execfile(filename, myg). Note this doesn't protect against malicious code.
I will burn in Python hell, but what's life without a little fun.
Important disclaimers:
I only provide this example for fun
I'm 100% sure I don't understand this well
It might not even be safe to do this, in any sense
I don't think this is practical
I don't think this is a good idea
I don't even want to seriously try to implement this
This doesn't work for jupyter (probably ipython too)*
Maybe you can't overload assignment, but you can (at least with Python ~3.9) achieve what you want even at the top-level namespace. It will be hard doing it "properly" for all cases, but here's a small example by hacking audithooks:
import sys
import ast
import inspect
import dis
import types
def hook(name, tup):
if name == "exec" and tup:
if tup and isinstance(tup[0], types.CodeType):
# Probably only works for my example
code = tup[0]
# We want to parse that code and find if it "stores" a variable.
# The ops for the example code would look something like this:
# ['LOAD_CONST', '<0>', 'STORE_NAME', '<0>',
# 'LOAD_CONST', 'POP_TOP', 'RETURN_VALUE', '<0>']
store_instruction_arg = None
instructions = [dis.opname[op] for op in code.co_code]
# Track the index so we can find the '<NUM>' index into the names
for i, instruction in enumerate(instructions):
# You might need to implement more logic here
# or catch more cases
if instruction == "STORE_NAME":
# store_instruction_arg in our case is 0.
# This might be the wrong way to parse get this value,
# but oh well.
store_instruction_arg = code.co_code[i + 1]
break
if store_instruction_arg is not None:
# code.co_names here is: ('a',)
var_name = code.co_names[store_instruction_arg]
# Check if the variable name has been previously defined.
# Will this work inside a function? a class? another
# module? Well... :D
if var_name in globals():
raise Exception("Cannot re-assign variable")
# Magic
sys.addaudithook(hook)
And here's the example:
>>> a = "123"
>>> a = 123
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 21, in hook
Exception: Cannot re-assign variable
>>> a
'123'
*For Jupyter I found another way that looked a tiny bit cleaner because I parsed the AST instead of the code object:
import sys
import ast
def hook(name, tup):
if name == "compile" and tup:
ast_mod = tup[0]
if isinstance(ast_mod, ast.Module):
assign_token = None
for token in ast_mod.body:
if isinstance(token, ast.Assign):
target, value = token.targets[0], token.value
var_name = target.id
if var_name in globals():
raise Exception("Can't re-assign variable")
sys.addaudithook(hook)
No there isn't
Think about it, in your example you are rebinding the name var to a new value.
You aren't actually touching the instance of Protect.
If the name you wish to rebind is in fact a property of some other entity i.e
myobj.var then you can prevent assigning a value to the property/attribute of the entity.
But I assume thats not what you want from your example.
Yes, It's possible, you can handle __assign__ via modify ast.
pip install assign
Test with:
class T():
def __assign__(self, v):
print('called with %s' % v)
b = T()
c = b
You will get
>>> import magic
>>> import test
called with c
The project is at https://github.com/RyanKung/assign
And the simpler gist: https://gist.github.com/RyanKung/4830d6c8474e6bcefa4edd13f122b4df
Generally, the best approach I found is overriding __ilshift__ as a setter and __rlshift__ as a getter, being duplicated by the property decorator.
It is almost the last operator being resolved just (| & ^) and logical are lower.
It is rarely used (__lrshift__ is less, but it can be taken to account).
Within using of PyPi assign package only forward assignment can be controlled, so actual 'strength' of the operator is lower.
PyPi assign package example:
class Test:
def __init__(self, val, name):
self._val = val
self._name = name
self.named = False
def __assign__(self, other):
if hasattr(other, 'val'):
other = other.val
self.set(other)
return self
def __rassign__(self, other):
return self.get()
def set(self, val):
self._val = val
def get(self):
if self.named:
return self._name
return self._val
#property
def val(self):
return self._val
x = Test(1, 'x')
y = Test(2, 'y')
print('x.val =', x.val)
print('y.val =', y.val)
x = y
print('x.val =', x.val)
z: int = None
z = x
print('z =', z)
x = 3
y = x
print('y.val =', y.val)
y.val = 4
output:
x.val = 1
y.val = 2
x.val = 2
z = <__main__.Test object at 0x0000029209DFD978>
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "E:\packages\pyksp\pyksp\compiler2\simple_test2.py", line 44, in <module>
print('y.val =', y.val)
AttributeError: 'int' object has no attribute 'val'
The same with shift:
class Test:
def __init__(self, val, name):
self._val = val
self._name = name
self.named = False
def __ilshift__(self, other):
if hasattr(other, 'val'):
other = other.val
self.set(other)
return self
def __rlshift__(self, other):
return self.get()
def set(self, val):
self._val = val
def get(self):
if self.named:
return self._name
return self._val
#property
def val(self):
return self._val
x = Test(1, 'x')
y = Test(2, 'y')
print('x.val =', x.val)
print('y.val =', y.val)
x <<= y
print('x.val =', x.val)
z: int = None
z <<= x
print('z =', z)
x <<= 3
y <<= x
print('y.val =', y.val)
y.val = 4
output:
x.val = 1
y.val = 2
x.val = 2
z = 2
y.val = 3
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "E:\packages\pyksp\pyksp\compiler2\simple_test.py", line 45, in <module>
y.val = 4
AttributeError: can't set attribute
So <<= operator within getting value at a property is the much more visually clean solution and it is not attempting user to make some reflective mistakes like:
var1.val = 1
var2.val = 2
# if we have to check type of input
var1.val = var2
# but it could be accendently typed worse,
# skipping the type-check:
var1.val = var2.val
# or much more worse:
somevar = var1 + var2
var1 += var2
# sic!
var1 = var2
In the global namespace this is not possible, but you could take advantage of more advanced Python metaprogramming to prevent multiple instances of a the Protect object from being created. The Singleton pattern is good example of this.
In the case of a Singleton you would ensure that once instantiated, even if the original variable referencing the instance is reassigned, that the object would persist. Any subsequent instances would just return a reference to the same object.
Despite this pattern, you would never be able to prevent a global variable name itself from being reassigned.
As mentioned by other people, there is no way to do it directly. It can be overridden for class members though, which is good for many cases.
As Ryan Kung mentioned, the AST of a package can be instrumented so that all assignments can have a side effect if the class assigned implements specific method(s). Building on his work to handle object creation and attribute assignment cases, the modified code and a full description is available here:
https://github.com/patgolez10/assignhooks
The package can be installed as: pip3 install assignhooks
Example <testmod.py>:
class SampleClass():
name = None
def __assignpre__(self, lhs_name, rhs_name, rhs):
print('PRE: assigning %s = %s' % (lhs_name, rhs_name))
# modify rhs if needed before assignment
if rhs.name is None:
rhs.name = lhs_name
return rhs
def __assignpost__(self, lhs_name, rhs_name):
print('POST: lhs', self)
print('POST: assigning %s = %s' % (lhs_name, rhs_name))
def myfunc():
b = SampleClass()
c = b
print('b.name', b.name)
to instrument it, e.g. <test.py>
import assignhooks
assignhooks.instrument.start() # instrument from now on
import testmod
assignhooks.instrument.stop() # stop instrumenting
# ... other imports and code bellow ...
testmod.myfunc()
Will produce:
$ python3 ./test.py
POST: lhs <testmod.SampleClass object at 0x1041dcc70>
POST: assigning b = SampleClass
PRE: assigning c = b
POST: lhs <testmod.SampleClass object at 0x1041dcc70>
POST: assigning c = b
b.name b
Beginning Python 3.8, it is possible to hint that a value is read-only using typing.Final. What this means is that nothing changes at runtime, allowing anyone to change the value, but if you're using any linter that can read type-hints then it's going to warn the user if they attempt to assign it.
from typing import Final
x: Final[int] = 3
x = 5 # Cannot assign to final name "x" (mypy)
This makes for way cleaner code, but it puts full trust in the user to respect it at runtime, making no attempt to stop users from changing values.
Another common pattern is to expose functions instead of module constants, like sys.getrecursionlimit and sys.setrecursionlimit.
def get_x() -> int:
return 3
Although users can do module.get_x = my_get_x, there's an obvious attempt on the user's part to break it, which can't be fixed. In this way we can prevent people from "accidentally" changing values in our module with minimal complexity.
A ugly solution is to reassign on destructor. But it's no real overload assignment.
import copy
global a
class MyClass():
def __init__(self):
a = 1000
# ...
def __del__(self):
a = copy.copy(self)
a = MyClass()
a = 1
I have a class and a normal constructor but I wish to preprocess the parameters and postprocess the result so I provide a mandated Factory constructor. Yes, I know that this is an unusual meaning for Factory and I also know that I could use memoization to do my processing but I had problems with extending a memoized class.
I wish to prevent myself from accidentally using the normal constructor and this is one way of doing it.
import inspect
class Foo():
def __init__(self):
actual_class_method = Foo.Factory
# [surely there's a way to do this without introspection?]
allowed_called_from = {name:method for name,method in inspect.getmembers(Foo, inspect.ismethod)}['Factory']
actual_called_from = inspect.currentframe().f_back.f_code # .co_name)
print("actual class method = ",actual_class_method," id = ",id(actual_class_method),",name = ",actual_class_method.__name__)
print("allowed called from = ",allowed_called_from,", id = ",id(allowed_called_from),", name =",allowed_called_from.__name__)
print()
print("actual called from = ",actual_called_from,", id = ",id(actual_called_from),", name =",actual_called_from.co_name)
#classmethod
def Factory(cls):
Foo()
Foo.Factory()
produces output
actual class method = <bound method Foo.Factory of <class '__main__.Foo'>> id = 3071817836 ,name = Factory
allowed called from = <bound method Foo.Factory of <class '__main__.Foo'>> , id = 3072138412 , name = Factory
actual called from = <code object Factory at 0xb7118f70, file "/home/david/Projects/Shapes/rebuild-v0/foo.py", line 15> , id = 3071381360 , name = Factory
Suppose I wished to check that the constructor to Foo() had been called from its Factory. I can find various things about the method whence Foo() was called such as its name and the filename where it was compiled, and this would be sufficient to stop me accidentally calling it directly, but I can't see a way of saying (the method that Foo() was called from) is (the method Factory() in the class Foo). Is there a way of doing this?
Alex Martelli posted an answer.
This might get you what you want:
class Foo:
def __init__(self):
print('Foo.__init__') # might consider throwing an exception
#classmethod
def makeit(cls):
self = cls.__new__(cls)
self.foo = 'foo'
return self
f = Foo() # accidentally create Foo in the usual way
g = Foo.makeit() # use the 'One True Way' of making a Foo
print(g.foo)
print(f.foo)
Output:
Foo.__init__
foo
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "D:\python\soMetaClassWorkAroundInit.py", line 19, in <module>
print(f.foo)
AttributeError: 'Foo' object has no attribute 'foo'
without inspect, you could provide a default argument to your constructor and check that the value passed is the one you're expecting (with default value at 0)
only the factory has a chance to pass the correct initialization value (or someone really wanting to call the constructor, but not by accident)
class Foo():
__MAGIC_INIT = 12345678
def __init__(self,magic=0):
if magic != self.__MAGIC_INIT:
raise Exception("Cannot call constructor, use the factory")
#classmethod
def Factory(cls):
return Foo(magic=Foo.__MAGIC_INIT)
f = Foo.Factory() # works
f = Foo() # exception
another variation would be to toggle a private "locking" boolean. If set to True, crash when entering constructor, else let it do its job, then reset to True.
Of course the factor has access to this boolean, and can set it to False before calling the constructor:
class Foo():
__FORBID_CONSTRUCTION = True
def __init__(self):
if self.__FORBID_CONSTRUCTION:
raise Exception("Cannot call constructor, use the factory")
Foo.__FORBID_CONSTRUCTION = True # reset to True
#classmethod
def Factory(cls):
Foo.__FORBID_CONSTRUCTION = False
return Foo()
f = Foo.Factory()
print("OK")
f = Foo()
not an issue even if multithreaded thanks to python GIL.