Develop Reference

Inherited has no attribute X after using `attr`

The following snippet runs fine:
class base:
#classmethod
def func(cls):
cls.params
class inherited(base):
params = 2
def my_func(self):
inherited.func()
obj = inherited()
obj.my_func()
However, when I add attr:
import attr
class base:
#classmethod
def func(cls):
cls.params
#attr.s
class inherited(base):
params = attr.ib()
def my_func(self):
inherited.func()
obj = inherited(2)
obj.my_func()
it now gives the error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test.py", line 16, in <module>
obj.my_func()
File "test.py", line 13, in my_func
inherited.func()
File "test.py", line 8, in func
cls.params
AttributeError: type object 'inherited' has no attribute 'params'
Why is it not able to find params in this case?

You have abused the attrs library by accessing a class attribute defined as a placeholder for an instance attribute. That pattern is not and should not be supported by the attrs. Original class attributes used for placeholders are removed by the decorator attr.s.
You can see that from the following example.
import attr
def probe_cls(prefix):
def not_wrap(cls):
print(prefix, hasattr(cls, 'a'))
return cls
return not_wrap
#probe_cls('after:')
#attr.s
#probe_cls('before:')
class X:
a = attr.ib()
This will output the following.
before: True
after: False
For details, see the official document for the class decorator, and the wrapping implementation.
As a side note, I recommend to use the modern API such as attrs.define.

How to use python's getattr feature on a method of a class? [duplicate]

If I have a class ...
class MyClass:
def method(arg):
print(arg)
... which I use to create an object ...
my_object = MyClass()
... on which I call method("foo") like so ...
>>> my_object.method("foo")
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: method() takes exactly 1 positional argument (2 given)
... why does Python tell me I gave it two arguments, when I only gave one?

In Python, this:
my_object.method("foo")
... is syntactic sugar, which the interpreter translates behind the scenes into:
MyClass.method(my_object, "foo")
... which, as you can see, does indeed have two arguments - it's just that the first one is implicit, from the point of view of the caller.
This is because most methods do some work with the object they're called on, so there needs to be some way for that object to be referred to inside the method. By convention, this first argument is called self inside the method definition:
class MyNewClass:
def method(self, arg):
print(self)
print(arg)
If you call method("foo") on an instance of MyNewClass, it works as expected:
>>> my_new_object = MyNewClass()
>>> my_new_object.method("foo")
<__main__.MyNewClass object at 0x29045d0>
foo
Occasionally (but not often), you really don't care about the object that your method is bound to, and in that circumstance, you can decorate the method with the builtin staticmethod() function to say so:
class MyOtherClass:
#staticmethod
def method(arg):
print(arg)
... in which case you don't need to add a self argument to the method definition, and it still works:
>>> my_other_object = MyOtherClass()
>>> my_other_object.method("foo")
foo

In simple words
In Python you should add self as the first parameter to all defined methods in classes:
class MyClass:
def method(self, arg):
print(arg)
Then you can use your method according to your intuition:
>>> my_object = MyClass()
>>> my_object.method("foo")
foo
For a better understanding, you can also read the answers to this question: What is the purpose of self?

Something else to consider when this type of error is encountered:
I was running into this error message and found this post helpful. Turns out in my case I had overridden an __init__() where there was object inheritance.
The inherited example is rather long, so I'll skip to a more simple example that doesn't use inheritance:
class MyBadInitClass:
def ___init__(self, name):
self.name = name
def name_foo(self, arg):
print(self)
print(arg)
print("My name is", self.name)
class MyNewClass:
def new_foo(self, arg):
print(self)
print(arg)
my_new_object = MyNewClass()
my_new_object.new_foo("NewFoo")
my_bad_init_object = MyBadInitClass(name="Test Name")
my_bad_init_object.name_foo("name foo")
Result is:
<__main__.MyNewClass object at 0x033C48D0>
NewFoo
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:/Users/Orange/PycharmProjects/Chapter9/bad_init_example.py", line 41, in <module>
my_bad_init_object = MyBadInitClass(name="Test Name")
TypeError: object() takes no parameters
PyCharm didn't catch this typo. Nor did Notepad++ (other editors/IDE's might).
Granted, this is a "takes no parameters" TypeError, it isn't much different than "got two" when expecting one, in terms of object initialization in Python.
Addressing the topic: An overloading initializer will be used if syntactically correct, but if not it will be ignored and the built-in used instead. The object won't expect/handle this and the error is thrown.
In the case of the sytax error: The fix is simple, just edit the custom init statement:
def __init__(self, name):
self.name = name

Newcomer to Python, I had this issue when I was using the Python's ** feature in a wrong way. Trying to call this definition from somewhere:
def create_properties_frame(self, parent, **kwargs):
using a call without a double star was causing the problem:
self.create_properties_frame(frame, kw_gsp)
TypeError: create_properties_frame() takes 2 positional arguments but 3 were given
The solution is to add ** to the argument:
self.create_properties_frame(frame, **kw_gsp)

As mentioned in other answers - when you use an instance method you need to pass self as the first argument - this is the source of the error.
With addition to that,it is important to understand that only instance methods take self as the first argument in order to refer to the instance.
In case the method is Static you don't pass self, but a cls argument instead (or class_).
Please see an example below.
class City:
country = "USA" # This is a class level attribute which will be shared across all instances (and not created PER instance)
def __init__(self, name, location, population):
self.name = name
self.location = location
self.population = population
# This is an instance method which takes self as the first argument to refer to the instance
def print_population(self, some_nice_sentence_prefix):
print(some_nice_sentence_prefix +" In " +self.name + " lives " +self.population + " people!")
# This is a static (class) method which is marked with the #classmethod attribute
# All class methods must take a class argument as first param. The convention is to name is "cls" but class_ is also ok
#classmethod
def change_country(cls, new_country):
cls.country = new_country
Some tests just to make things more clear:
# Populate objects
city1 = City("New York", "East", "18,804,000")
city2 = City("Los Angeles", "West", "10,118,800")
#1) Use the instance method: No need to pass "self" - it is passed as the city1 instance
city1.print_population("Did You Know?") # Prints: Did You Know? In New York lives 18,804,000 people!
#2.A) Use the static method in the object
city2.change_country("Canada")
#2.B) Will be reflected in all objects
print("city1.country=",city1.country) # Prints Canada
print("city2.country=",city2.country) # Prints Canada

It occurs when you don't specify the no of parameters the __init__() or any other method looking for.
For example:
class Dog:
def __init__(self):
print("IN INIT METHOD")
def __unicode__(self,):
print("IN UNICODE METHOD")
def __str__(self):
print("IN STR METHOD")
obj = Dog("JIMMY", 1, 2, 3, "WOOF")
When you run the above programme, it gives you an error like that:
TypeError: __init__() takes 1 positional argument but 6 were given
How we can get rid of this thing?
Just pass the parameters, what __init__() method looking for
class Dog:
def __init__(self, dogname, dob_d, dob_m, dob_y, dogSpeakText):
self.name_of_dog = dogname
self.date_of_birth = dob_d
self.month_of_birth = dob_m
self.year_of_birth = dob_y
self.sound_it_make = dogSpeakText
def __unicode__(self, ):
print("IN UNICODE METHOD")
def __str__(self):
print("IN STR METHOD")
obj = Dog("JIMMY", 1, 2, 3, "WOOF")
print(id(obj))

If you want to call method without creating object, you can change method to static method.
class MyClass:
#staticmethod
def method(arg):
print(arg)
MyClass.method("i am a static method")

I get this error when I'm sleep-deprived, and create a class using def instead of class:
def MyClass():
def __init__(self, x):
self.x = x
a = MyClass(3)
-> TypeError: MyClass() takes 0 positional arguments but 1 was given

You should actually create a class:
class accum:
def __init__(self):
self.acc = 0
def accumulator(self, var2add, end):
if not end:
self.acc+=var2add
return self.acc

In my case, I forgot to add the ()
I was calling the method like this
obj = className.myMethod
But it should be is like this
obj = className.myMethod()

xml mapping using Class in Python without error

import xml.etree.ElementTree as ET
from pprint import pprint
class xml_mapping:
def read_field(xml_node, name):
return [child.get(name) for child in xml_node.iter('field')]
def read_map(xml_node):
f = root.attrib
dict1 = {f['name']:['input_layer','output_layer','fields']}
dict1[f['name']][0] = {
'input_layer': root.find('input_layer').get('name'),
}
dict1[f['name']][1] = {
'output_layer': root.find('output_layer').get('name'),
}
for child in xml_node:
if child.tag == 'field_mapping':
fields = {}
for field_name in ['input_name','output_name']:
fields[field_name] = read_field(child, field_name)
dict1[f['name']][2] = {
'fields': dict(zip(fields['output_name'],fields['input_name'])),
}
return dict1
c = xml_mapping
tree = ET.parse('substation.xml')
root = tree.getroot()
pprint (c.read_map(root))
When I tried this I am getting an error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:\Python27\final_xml_mapping_f.py", line 25, in <module>
pprint (c.read_map(root))
TypeError: read_map() takes exactly 1 argument (2 given)
Somebody Pls help me to clear this.

You have two problems:
Your method declaration is missing the self parameter.
You are not instantiating your class
For example:
class xml_mapping(object):
def read_fields(self, xml_node, name):
# ...
def read_map(self, xml_node): # needs implicit self parameter
self.read_fields(x, y) # call another method
instance = xml_mapping() # instantiate class
instance.read_map(argument) # call method
The implicit self argument refers to the instance.
Alternatives
If you don't want to instantiate the class you can declare a classmethod or a staticmethod. These can both be called on the class itself, without an instance:
class Foo(object):
#classmethod
def bar(cls, arg):
print arg
#staticmethod
def baz(arg):
print arg
Foo.bar(1)
Foo.baz(2)
In the classmethod version, the function gets an implicit cls argument, which is the class itself. The staticmethod version gets no implicit arguments.
You probably don't want to do that unless you have a good reason to do so.

pickling dict inherited class is missing internal values

I've played around for a bit with the code and obviously the reason for the failure is that when setting 'wham' the value is another instance of the class TestDict which works fine as long as i don't try to pickle and unpickle it.
Because if i do self.test is missing.
Traceback:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test.py", line 30, in <module>
loads_a = loads(dumps_a)
File "test.py", line 15, in __setitem__
if self.test == False:
AttributeError: 'TestDict' object has no attribute 'test'
The code:
from pickle import dumps, loads
class TestDict(dict):
def __init__(self, test=False, data={}):
super().__init__(data)
self.test = test
def __getitem__(self, k):
if self.test == False:
pass
return dict.__getitem__(self, k)
def __setitem__(self, k, v):
if self.test == False:
pass
if type(v) == dict:
super().__setitem__(k, TestDict(False, v))
else:
super().__setitem__(k, v)
if __name__ == '__main__':
a = TestDict()
a['wham'] = {'bam' : 1}
b = TestDict(True)
b['wham'] = {'bam' : 2}
dumps_a = dumps(a)
dumps_b = dumps(b)
loads_a = loads(dumps_a)
loads_b = loads(dumps_b)
print(loads_a)
print(loads_b)
The code works if not replacing __setitem__ and __getitem__ but i want to add extra functionality to those two specific functions.
I've also tried:
class TestDict(dict):
__module__ = os.path.splitext(os.path.basename(__file__))[0]
Which sort of worked, as long as i don't nest TestDict within TestDict meaning i won't get to replace __setitem__ and __getitem__ in sub-parts of the dictionary.

Define __reduce__ method:
class TestDict(dict):
...
def __reduce__(self):
return type(self), (self.test, dict(self))

The problem is that pickle doesn't call the __init__ method of the object when it does the unpicling, so the self.test variable is not created at the moment when it tries to set the items of the dictionary.
Apparently setting the attributes is staged after setting items of the dictionary.
One way to solve it is to add a class level attribute that will be overridden in the instances:
class TestDict(dict):
test = False
...

Python: changing methods and attributes at runtime

I wish to create a class in Python that I can add and remove attributes and methods. How can I acomplish that?
Oh, and please don't ask why.

This example shows the differences between adding a method to a class and to an instance.
>>> class Dog():
... def __init__(self, name):
... self.name = name
...
>>> skip = Dog('Skip')
>>> spot = Dog('Spot')
>>> def talk(self):
... print 'Hi, my name is ' + self.name
...
>>> Dog.talk = talk # add method to class
>>> skip.talk()
Hi, my name is Skip
>>> spot.talk()
Hi, my name is Spot
>>> del Dog.talk # remove method from class
>>> skip.talk() # won't work anymore
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: Dog instance has no attribute 'talk'
>>> import types
>>> f = types.MethodType(talk, skip, Dog)
>>> skip.talk = f # add method to specific instance
>>> skip.talk()
Hi, my name is Skip
>>> spot.talk() # won't work, since we only modified skip
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: Dog instance has no attribute 'talk'

I wish to create a class in Python that I can add and remove attributes and methods.
import types
class SpecialClass(object):
#classmethod
def removeVariable(cls, name):
return delattr(cls, name)
#classmethod
def addMethod(cls, func):
return setattr(cls, func.__name__, types.MethodType(func, cls))
def hello(self, n):
print n
instance = SpecialClass()
SpecialClass.addMethod(hello)
>>> SpecialClass.hello(5)
5
>>> instance.hello(6)
6
>>> SpecialClass.removeVariable("hello")
>>> instance.hello(7)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'SpecialClass' object has no attribute 'hello'
>>> SpecialClass.hello(8)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: type object 'SpecialClass' has no attribute 'hello'

A possibly interesting alternative to using types.MethodType in:
>>> f = types.MethodType(talk, puppy, Dog)
>>> puppy.talk = f # add method to specific instance
would be to exploit the fact that functions are descriptors:
>>> puppy.talk = talk.__get__(puppy, Dog)

I wish to create a class in Python that I can add and remove attributes and methods. How can I acomplish that?
You can add and remove attributes and methods to any class, and they'll be available to all instances of the class:
>>> def method1(self):
pass
>>> def method1(self):
print "method1"
>>> def method2(self):
print "method2"
>>> class C():
pass
>>> c = C()
>>> c.method()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#62>", line 1, in <module>
c.method()
AttributeError: C instance has no attribute 'method'
>>> C.method = method1
>>> c.method()
method1
>>> C.method = method2
>>> c.method()
method2
>>> del C.method
>>> c.method()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<pyshell#68>", line 1, in <module>
c.method()
AttributeError: C instance has no attribute 'method'
>>> C.attribute = "foo"
>>> c.attribute
'foo'
>>> c.attribute = "bar"
>>> c.attribute
'bar'

you can just assign directly to the class (either by accessing the original class name or via __class__ ):
class a : pass
ob=a()
ob.__class__.blah=lambda self,k: (3, self,k)
ob.blah(5)
ob2=a()
ob2.blah(7)
will print
(3, <__main__.a instance at 0x7f18e3c345f0>, 5)
(3, <__main__.a instance at 0x7f18e3c344d0>, 7)

Simply:
f1 = lambda:0 #method for instances
f2 = lambda _:0 #method for class
class C: pass #class
c1,c2 = C(),C() #instances
print dir(c1),dir(c2)
#add to the Instances
c1.func = f1
c1.any = 1.23
print dir(c1),dir(c2)
print c1.func(),c1.any
del c1.func,c1.any
#add to the Class
C.func = f2
C.any = 1.23
print dir(c1),dir(c2)
print c1.func(),c1.any
print c2.func(),c2.any
which results in:
['__doc__', '__module__'] ['__doc__', '__module__']
['__doc__', '__module__', 'any', 'func'] ['__doc__', '__module__']
0 1.23
['__doc__', '__module__', 'any', 'func'] ['__doc__', '__module__', 'any', 'func']
0 1.23
0 1.23

another alternative, if you need to replace the class wholesale is to modify the class attribute:
>>> class A(object):
... def foo(self):
... print 'A'
...
>>> class B(object):
... def foo(self):
... print 'Bar'
...
>>> a = A()
>>> a.foo()
A
>>> a.__class__ = B
>>> a.foo()
Bar

Does the class itself necessarily need to be modified? Or is the goal simply to replace what object.method() does at a particular point during runtime?
I ask because I sidestep the problem of actually modifying the class to monkey patch specific method calls in my framework with getattribute and a Runtime Decorator on my Base inheritance object.
Methods retrieved by a Base object in getattribute are wrapped in a Runtime_Decorator that parses the method calls keyword arguments for decorators/monkey patches to apply.
This enables you to utilize the syntax object.method(monkey_patch="mypatch"), object.method(decorator="mydecorator"), and even object.method(decorators=my_decorator_list).
This works for any individual method call (I leave out magic methods), does so without actually modifying any class/instance attributes, can utilize arbitrary, even foreign methods to patch, and will work transparently on sublcasses that inherit from Base (provided they don't override getattribute of course).
import trace
def monkey_patched(self, *args, **kwargs):
print self, "Tried to call a method, but it was monkey patched instead"
return "and now for something completely different"
class Base(object):
def __init__(self):
super(Base, self).__init__()
def testmethod(self):
print "%s test method" % self
def __getattribute__(self, attribute):
value = super(Base, self).__getattribute__(attribute)
if "__" not in attribute and callable(value):
value = Runtime_Decorator(value)
return value
class Runtime_Decorator(object):
def __init__(self, function):
self.function = function
def __call__(self, *args, **kwargs):
if kwargs.has_key("monkey_patch"):
module_name, patch_name = self._resolve_string(kwargs.pop("monkey_patch"))
module = self._get_module(module_name)
monkey_patch = getattr(module, patch_name)
return monkey_patch(self.function.im_self, *args, **kwargs)
if kwargs.has_key('decorator'):
decorator_type = str(kwargs['decorator'])
module_name, decorator_name = self._resolve_string(decorator_type)
decorator = self._get_decorator(decorator_name, module_name)
wrapped_function = decorator(self.function)
del kwargs['decorator']
return wrapped_function(*args, **kwargs)
elif kwargs.has_key('decorators'):
decorators = []
for item in kwargs['decorators']:
module_name, decorator_name = self._resolve_string(item)
decorator = self._get_decorator(decorator_name, module_name)
decorators.append(decorator)
wrapped_function = self.function
for item in reversed(decorators):
wrapped_function = item(wrapped_function)
del kwargs['decorators']
return wrapped_function(*args, **kwargs)
else:
return self.function(*args, **kwargs)
def _resolve_string(self, string):
try: # attempt to split the string into a module and attribute
module_name, decorator_name = string.split(".")
except ValueError: # there was no ".", it's just a single attribute
module_name = "__main__"
decorator_name = string
finally:
return module_name, decorator_name
def _get_module(self, module_name):
try: # attempt to load the module if it exists already
module = modules[module_name]
except KeyError: # import it if it doesn't
module = __import__(module_name)
finally:
return module
def _get_decorator(self, decorator_name, module_name):
module = self._get_module(module_name)
try: # attempt to procure the decorator class
decorator_wrap = getattr(module, decorator_name)
except AttributeError: # decorator not found in module
print("failed to locate decorators %s for function %s." %\
(kwargs["decorator"], self.function))
else:
return decorator_wrap # instantiate the class with self.function
class Tracer(object):
def __init__(self, function):
self.function = function
def __call__(self, *args, **kwargs):
tracer = trace.Trace(trace=1)
tracer.runfunc(self.function, *args, **kwargs)
b = Base()
b.testmethod(monkey_patch="monkey_patched")
b.testmethod(decorator="Tracer")
#b.testmethod(monkey_patch="external_module.my_patch")
The downside to this approach is getattribute hooks all access to attributes, so the checking of and potential wrapping of methods occurs even for attributes that are not methods + won't be utilizing the feature for the particular call in question. And using getattribute at all is inherently somewhat complicated.
The actual impact of this overhead in my experience/for my purposes has been negligible, and my machine runs a dual core Celeron. The previous implementation I used introspected methods upon object init and bound the Runtime_Decorator to methods then. Doing things that way eliminated the need to utilize getattribute and reduced the overhead mentioned previously... however, it also breaks pickle (maybe not dill) and is less dynamic then this approach.
The only use cases I have actually come across "in the wild" with this technique were with timing and tracing decorators. However, the possibilities it opens up are extremely wide ranging.
If you have a preexisting class that cannot be made to inherit from a different base (or utilize the technique it's own class definition or in it's base class'), then the whole thing simply does not apply to your issue at all unfortunately.
I don't think setting/removing non-callable attributes on a class at runtime is necessarily so challenging? unless you want classes that inherit from the modified class to automatically reflect the changes in themselves as well... That'd be a whole 'nother can o' worms by the sound of it though.