What is the correct name for operator *, as in function(*args)? unpack, unzip, something else?
In Ruby and Perl 6 this has been called "splat", and I think most people from
those communities will figure out what you mean if you call it that.
The Python tutorial uses the phrase "unpacking argument lists", which is
long and descriptive.
It is also referred to as iterable unpacking, or in the case of **,
dictionary unpacking.
I call it "positional expansion", as opposed to ** which I call "keyword expansion".
The Python Tutorial simply calls it 'the *-operator'. It performs unpacking of arbitrary argument lists.
I say "star-args" and Python people seem to know what i mean.
** is trickier - I think just "qargs" since it is usually used as **kw or **kwargs
One can also call * a gather parameter (when used in function arguments definition) or a scatter operator (when used at function invocation).
As seen here: Think Python/Tuples/Variable-length argument tuples.
I believe it's most commonly called the "splat operator." Unpacking arguments is what it does.
The technical term for this is a Variadic function. So in a sense, that's the correct term without regard to programming language.
That said, in different languages the term does have legitimate names. As others have mentioned, it is called "splat" in ruby, julia, and several other languages and is noted by that name in official documentation. In javascript it is called the "spread" syntax. It has many other names in many other languages, as mentioned in other answers. Whatever you call it, it's quite useful!
For a colloquial name there is "splatting".
For arguments (list type) you use single * and for keyword arguments (dictionary type) you use double **.
Both * and ** is sometimes referred to as "splatting".
See for reference of this name being used:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/47875892/14305096
I call *args "star args" or "varargs" and **kwargs "keyword args".
Related
I came across this - in my view - strange behaviour:
"a b c".split(maxsplit=1)
TypeError: split() takes no keyword arguments
Why does str.split() not take keyword arguments, even though it would make sense? I found this behavior both in Python2 and Python3.
See this bug and its superseder.
str.split() is a native function in CPython, and as such exhibits the behavior described here:
CPython implementation detail: An implementation may provide built-in
functions whose positional parameters do not have names, even if they
are ‘named’ for the purpose of documentation, and which therefore
cannot be supplied by keyword. In CPython, this is the case for
functions implemented in C that use PyArg_ParseTuple() to parse their
arguments.
str.split is a builtin method implemented in C. Unfortunately some builtin functions/methods do not accept keyword arguments. See this bug report.
It may be a dumb question but what kind of data type is a def from Python in C ?
like int, uint32_t etc.. or nothing of all of this ?
Thanks
def is a keyword in python. (It introduces the definition of functions.) It is not a datatype at all.
def is the Python's keyword that is used at the start of the function/method definition.
C and Python are fundamentally different languages and doing a line by line translation is impossible. To answer your direct question, def is a keyword in Python that only marks the start of a function declaration. There is no such keyword in C. Sure, you need keywords to declare functions, but there is no single keyword that is required.
Furthermore, you cannot compare types either. C has a sh*tload of different types just for integers. Python3 only has one, and it has unlimited precision. Such a type does not exist in C, although there are libraries that provides the same functionality.
Implementing some Neural Network with tensorflow, I've faced a method which parameters have took my attention. I'm talking about tf.nn.sigmoid_cross_entropy_with_logits (Documentation here).
The first parameter it receives as first parameter _sentinel=None which, according to the documentation:
_sentinel: Used to prevent positional parameters. Internal, do not use.
I understand that by having this parameter, next ones have to be named instead of positional is this one don't have to be used, but my question is. In which cases does prevent positional parameters have some benefit? What is their main goal to use this? Because I could also run
tf.nn.sigmoid_cross_entropy_with_logits(None, my_labels, my_logits)
being all arguments positional. Anyway, I want to clarify that my question is not focused in TensorFlow, it's just the example that I have found.
Positional parameters couple the caller and receiver on the order of the parameters. It makes refactoring the order of the reciver's parameters more difficult.
For example, if I have
def foo(a, b, c):
do_stuff(a,b,c)
and I decide, for reasons, perhaps I want to make a partial function or whatever, that it would be better to have
def foo(b, a, c):
do_stuff(a,b,c)
But now I have callers in the wild and it would be very rude to change my contract, so I'm stuck.
Sandi Metz in Practical Object-Oriented Design in Ruby also addresses this. (I know this is python, but oop is oop)
When the code [is changed to use keyword arguments], it lost its dependency
on argument order but it gained a dependency on the names of the keys
in the [keyword arguments]. This change is healthy. The new dependency is
more stable than the old, and thus this code faces less risk of being
forced to change. Additionally, and perhaps unexpectedly, the [keywords]
provides one new, secondary benefit: The key names in the hash furnish
explicit documentation about the arguments. This is a byproduct of
using a hash but the fact that it is unintentional makes it no less
useful. Future maintainers of this code will be grateful for the
information.
Keyword arguments are also nice if you have a lot of parameters. Order is easy to get wrong. It may also make a nicer API in the opinion of the authors.
PEP-3102 also addresses this, but I find the rationale unsatisfying from the perspective of "why would I choose to design something like this"
The current Python function-calling paradigm allows arguments to be
specified either by position or by keyword. An argument can be filled
in either explicitly by name, or implicitly by position.
There are often cases where it is desirable for a function to take a
variable number of arguments. The Python language supports this using
the 'varargs' syntax (*name), which specifies that any 'left over'
arguments be passed into the varargs parameter as a tuple.
One limitation on this is that currently, all of the regular argument
slots must be filled before the vararg slot can be.
This is not always desirable. One can easily envision a function which
takes a variable number of arguments, but also takes one or more
'options' in the form of keyword arguments. Currently, the only way to
do this is to define both a varargs argument, and a 'keywords'
argument (**kwargs), and then manually extract the desired keywords
from the dictionary.
What is the use for keyword only parameters:
For some function, it is impossible to do otherwise (ex: print(a, b, end=''))
It prevents you from making silly mistakes, consider the following example:
# if it wasn't made with kw-only parameters, this would return 3
>>> sorted(3, 1)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: sorted expected 1 arguments, got 2
>>> sorted((1,2), reverse=True)
[2, 1]
It allows you to change things later:
# if
def sorted(iterable, reverse=False)
# becomes
def sorted(iterable, key=None, reverse=False)
# you can guarantee backwards compatibility
First, a caveat that I can't know the intention of the person who wrote that. However, I can offer reason why “prevent positional parameters” might be desirable.
It's often important that a parameter be keyword-only, that is, it must be used only by name. The parameter is not conceptually an input to the function's purpose; it's more a modifier (change the behaviour in this way), or an external resource (here is the log file to emit your messages to), etc.
For that reason, Python 3 now allows you to define, in the signature of the function, specific parameters as keyword-only parameters. The change is documented in PEP 3102 Keyword-only arguments along with rationale.
I have started to learn python, and I would like to ask you about something which I considered a little magic in this language.
I would like to note that before learning python I worked with PHP and there I haven't noticed that.
What's going on - I have noticed that some call constructors or methods in Python are in this form.
object.call(variable1 = value1, variable2 = value2)
For example, in FLask:
app.run(debug=True, threaded=True)
Is any reason for this convention? Or is there some semantical reason outgoing from the language fundamentals? I haven't seen something like that in PHP as often as in Python and because I'm really surprised. I'm really curious if there is some magic or it's only convention to read code easier.
These are called keyword arguments, and they're usually used to make the call more readable.
They can also be used to pass the arguments in a different order from the declared parameters, or to skip over some default parameters but pass arguments to others, or because the function requires keyword arguments… but readability is the core reason for their existence.
Consider this:
app.run(True, False)
Do you have any idea what those two arguments mean? Even if you can guess that the only two reasonable arguments are threading and debugging flags, how can you guess which one comes first? The only way you can do it is to figure out what type app is, and check the app.run method's docstring or definition.
But here:
app.run(debug=True, threaded=False)
It's obvious what it means.
It's worth reading the FAQ What is the difference between arguments and parameters?, and the other tutorial sections near the one linked above. Then you can read the reference on Function definitions for full details on parameters and Calls for full details on arguments, and finally the inspect module documentation on kinds of parameters.
This blog post attempts to summarize everything in those references so you don't have to read your way through the whole mess. The examples at the end should also serve to show why mixing up arguments and parameters in general, keyword arguments and default parameters, argument unpacking and variable parameters, etc. will lead you astray.
Specifying arguments by keyword often creates less risk of error than specifying arguments solely by position. Consider this function to compute loan payments:
def pmt(principal, interest, term):
return **something**;
When one tries to compute the amortization of their house purchase, it might be invoked thus:
payment = pmt(100000, 4.2, 360)
But it is difficult to see which of those values should be associated with which parameter. Without checking the documentation, we might think it should have been:
payment = pmt(360, 4.2, 100000)
Using keyword parameters, the call becomes self-documenting:
payment = pmt(principal=100000, interest=4.2, term=360)
Additionally, keyword parameters allow you to change the order of the parameters at the call site, and everything still works correctly:
# Equivalent to previous example
payment = pmt(term=360, interest=4.2, principal=100000)
See http://docs.python.org/2/tutorial/controlflow.html#keyword-arguments for more information.
They are arguments passed by keywords. There is no semantical difference between keyword arguments and positional arguments.
They are often used like "options", and provide a much more readable syntax for this circumstance. Think of this:
>>> sorted([2,-1,3], key=lambda x: x**2, reverse=True)
[3, 2, -1]
Versus(python2):
>>> sorted([2,-1,3], None, lambda x: x**2, True)
[3, 2, -1]
In this second example can you tell what's the meaning of None or True?
Note that in keyword only arguments, i.e. arguments that you can only specify using this syntax, were introduced in python3. In python2 any argument can be specified by position(except when using **kwargs but that's another issue).
There is no "magic".
A function can take:
Positional arguments (args)
Keyworded arguments (kwargs)
Always is this order.
Try this:
def foo(*args, **kwargs):
print args
print kwargs
foo(1,2,3,4,a=8,b=12)
Output:
(1, 2, 3, 4)
{'a': 8, 'b': 12}
Python stores the positional arguments in a tuple, which has to be immutable, and the keyworded ones in a dictionary.
The main utility of the convention is that it allows for setting certain inputs when there may be some defaults in between. It's particularly useful when a function has many parameters, most of which work fine with their defaults, but a few need to be set to other values for the function to work as desired.
example:
def foo(i1, i2=1, i3=3, i4=5):
# does something
foo(1,2,3,4)
foo(1,2,i4=3)
foo(1,i2=3)
foo(0,i3=1,i2=3,i4=5)
I came across this - in my view - strange behaviour:
"a b c".split(maxsplit=1)
TypeError: split() takes no keyword arguments
Why does str.split() not take keyword arguments, even though it would make sense? I found this behavior both in Python2 and Python3.
See this bug and its superseder.
str.split() is a native function in CPython, and as such exhibits the behavior described here:
CPython implementation detail: An implementation may provide built-in
functions whose positional parameters do not have names, even if they
are ‘named’ for the purpose of documentation, and which therefore
cannot be supplied by keyword. In CPython, this is the case for
functions implemented in C that use PyArg_ParseTuple() to parse their
arguments.
str.split is a builtin method implemented in C. Unfortunately some builtin functions/methods do not accept keyword arguments. See this bug report.