Related
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).
In Python, you can say this:
s = 'fred loves mary'
r = s.replace
s = r('fred','ben')
print s
...and you get, very handily, sort of:
ben loves mary
However, because when you said r = s.replace you created an object that always contains 'fred loves mary', this doesn't produce "ben loves deb"...
s = 'fred loves mary'
r = s.replace
s = r('fred','ben')
s = r('mary','deb')
print s
...instead, it produces:
fred loves deb
I understand what's happening. But the ability to actually write quick code like the latter set and have it work, that is, produce:
ben loves deb
...would be awesome. So my question is, is there a way to do that other than defining ObviousFunction(s,x,y) or a class, viz:
class xs:
def __init__(self,s):
self.s = s
def r(self,x,y):
self.s = self.s.replace(x,y)
def __str__(self):
return self.s
s = xs('fred loves mary')
s = s.r('mary','deb')
s = s.r('fred','ben')
print s
...which actually does produce:
ben loves deb
...but for further string ops, requires the following type of gymnastics:
print s.s.upper()
...
BEN LOVES DEB
I took a look for any ability to extend an existing class (str in this case), but came up dry. Weak google-fu?
Hmmm. Ok, I got this far:
class xs(str)
def r(self,x,y):
return xs(self.replace(x,y))
...which will do this:
s = xs('fred loves mary')
s = s.r('fred','ben')
s = s.r('mary','deb')
# so far, so good; s is still class xs and you can go on forever
# but if you do this:
s = s.replace('ben','meezer')
# now s is an object of class str
...so is there any way to coerce a return value generally to the original class, as I've coerced the value .r() is returning? Other than just saying...
s = xs(s)
...afterwards?
I can see that one could extend this class until one had managed to wrap every type of string call that returns a string and then toss the (largish) result in one's toolbox, but that's a lot of work for something that seems like it ought to be easy. Still, it might be the only solution, and if so... I'm definitely going to end up with such a class. The number of things class str could gain are legion, quite aside from the benefits of shortening all that wordiness so the work/character factor increases.
Thanks for any insight.
Ok, after all the assistance here and some further trolling about the net, I have something that is very close to what I wanted. I've written a much more complete class, but the following snippets exercise the issues directly associated with my original inquiry:
class xs(str):
def __add__(self,a): # OPERATORS
return xs(str(self) + a) # +
def __mod__(self,tup):
return xs(str(self) % tup) # %
def __getslice__(self,b,c):
return xs(str(self)[b:c]) # [:]
def r(self,x,y): # replace, as 'r'
return xs(self.replace(x,y))
Using the above, class identity is maintained, the ability to code up replacements for every class str function that returns a string is there, and everything else works just the way it does with strings. so...
a = xs('fred loves mary')
a = a.r('fred','ben')
a = a.r('mary','deb')
print a
...results in...
ben loves deb
...and...
b = a[:3] # get 'ben'
c = a[-3:] # get 'deb'
d = xs('%s adores %s') # format string
e = d % (b,c) # do the formatting
e = e.r('ben','charlie')
f = e + ' (so I hear)'
print f,str(type(f))
...yields...
charlie adores deb (so I hear) <class '__main__.xs'>
So as we can see, class xs is maintained throughout, standard operations apply as per usual. Anything that's in class str that doesn't return a string can remain unmolested; anything that does should be taken care of as .replace() is here. Objects of class xs can be used pretty much anywhere a string can, and in many cases, strings can be used with objects of class xs without causing problems; notable exception is the first operand of + and %, as these must be of class xs in order for the operator overrides to get hold of them in the first place.
What would have been best would have been the ability to extend class str. But subclassing it provides most of the benefits.
If anyone is actually interested, I'll post the full class (mostly complete as of now) somewhere you can grab it. Includes dotted quad string handiness, class exceptions, yadda yadda. Running under Python 2.6.1, would require additional work for Python 3.
Thanks to everyone for the help!
You just need to do a little more hard-coding:
s = 'fred loves mary'
s = s.replace('fred','ben')
s = s.replace('mary','deb')
print s
Output:
ben loves deb
I hope the following code will help you and I am using python 2.7
class xs(object):
def __init__(self,s):
self.s = s
def r(self,x,y):
self.s = self.s.replace(x,y)
return self
def __getattr__(self, name ):
return getattr(self.s, name)
def __str__(self):
return self.s
s = xs('fred loves mary')
s = s.r('mary','deb')
s = s.r('fred','ben')
print s
print s.upper()
I already read How to get a function name as a string?.
How can I do the same for a variable? As opposed to functions, Python variables do not have the __name__ attribute.
In other words, if I have a variable such as:
foo = dict()
foo['bar'] = 2
I am looking for a function/attribute, e.g. retrieve_name() in order to create a DataFrame in Pandas from this list, where the column names are given by the names of the actual dictionaries:
# List of dictionaries for my DataFrame
list_of_dicts = [n_jobs, users, queues, priorities]
columns = [retrieve_name(d) for d in list_of_dicts]
With Python 3.8 one can simply use f-string debugging feature:
>>> foo = dict()
>>> f'{foo=}'.split('=')[0]
'foo'
One drawback of this method is that in order to get 'foo' printed you have to add f'{foo=}' yourself. In other words, you already have to know the name of the variable. In other words, the above code snippet is exactly the same as just
>>> 'foo'
Even if variable values don't point back to the name, you have access to the list of every assigned variable and its value, so I'm astounded that only one person suggested looping through there to look for your var name.
Someone mentioned on that answer that you might have to walk the stack and check everyone's locals and globals to find foo, but if foo is assigned in the scope where you're calling this retrieve_name function, you can use inspect's current frame to get you all of those local variables.
My explanation might be a little bit too wordy (maybe I should've used a "foo" less words), but here's how it would look in code (Note that if there is more than one variable assigned to the same value, you will get both of those variable names):
import inspect
x, y, z = 1, 2, 3
def retrieve_name(var):
callers_local_vars = inspect.currentframe().f_back.f_locals.items()
return [var_name for var_name, var_val in callers_local_vars if var_val is var]
print(retrieve_name(y))
If you're calling this function from another function, something like:
def foo(bar):
return retrieve_name(bar)
foo(baz)
And you want the baz instead of bar, you'll just need to go back a scope further. This can be done by adding an extra .f_back in the caller_local_vars initialization.
See an example here: ideone
The only objects in Python that have canonical names are modules, functions, and classes, and of course there is no guarantee that this canonical name has any meaning in any namespace after the function or class has been defined or the module imported. These names can also be modified after the objects are created so they may not always be particularly trustworthy.
What you want to do is not possible without recursively walking the tree of named objects; a name is a one-way reference to an object. A common or garden-variety Python object contains no references to its names. Imagine if every integer, every dict, every list, every Boolean needed to maintain a list of strings that represented names that referred to it! It would be an implementation nightmare, with little benefit to the programmer.
TL;DR
Use the Wrapper helper from python-varname:
from varname.helpers import Wrapper
foo = Wrapper(dict())
# foo.name == 'foo'
# foo.value == {}
foo.value['bar'] = 2
For list comprehension part, you can do:
n_jobs = Wrapper(<original_value>)
users = Wrapper(<original_value>)
queues = Wrapper(<original_value>)
priorities = Wrapper(<original_value>)
list_of_dicts = [n_jobs, users, queues, priorities]
columns = [d.name for d in list_of_dicts]
# ['n_jobs', 'users', 'queues', 'priorities']
# REMEMBER that you have to access the <original_value> by d.value
I am the author of the python-varname package. Please let me know if you have any questions or you can submit issues on Github.
The long answer
Is it even possible?
Yes and No.
We are retrieving the variable names at runtime, so we need a function to be called to enable us to access the previous frames to retrieve the variable names. That's why we need a Wrapper there. In that function, at runtime, we are parsing the source code/AST nodes in the previous frames to get the exact variable name.
However, the source code/AST nodes in the previous frames are not always available, or they could be modified by other environments (e.g: pytest's assert statement). One simple example is that the codes run via exec(). Even though we are still able to retrieve some information from the bytecode, it needs too much effort and it is also error-prone.
How to do it?
First of all, we need to identify which frame the variable is given. It's not always simply the direct previous frame. For example, we may have another wrapper for the function:
from varname import varname
def func():
return varname()
def wrapped():
return func()
x = wrapped()
In the above example, we have to skip the frame inside wrapped to get to the right frame x = wrapped() so that we are able to locate x. The arguments frame and ignore of varname allow us to skip some of these intermediate frames. See more details in the README file and the API docs of the package.
Then we need to parse the AST node to locate where the variable is assigned value (function call) to. It's not always just a simple assignment. Sometimes there could be complex AST nodes, for example, x = [wrapped()]. We need to identify the correct assignment by traversing the AST tree.
How reliable is it?
Once we identify the assignment node, it is reliable.
varname is all depending on executing package to look for the node. The node executing detects is ensured to be the correct one (see also this).
It partially works with environments where other AST magics apply, including pytest, ipython, macropy, birdseye, reticulate with R, etc. Neither executing nor varname is 100% working with those environments.
Do we need a package to do it?
Well, yes and no, again.
If your scenario is simple, the code provided by #juan Isaza or #scohe001 probably is enough for you to work with the case where a variable is defined at the direct previous frame and the AST node is a simple assignment. You just need to go one frame back and retrieve the information there.
However, if the scenario becomes complicated, or we need to adopt different application scenarios, you probably need a package like python-varname, to handle them. These scenarios may include to:
present more friendly messages when the source code is not available or AST nodes are not accessible
skip intermediate frames (allows the function to be wrapped or called in other intermediate frames)
automatically ignores calls from built-in functions or libraries. For example: x = str(func())
retrieve multiple variable names on the left-hand side of the assignment
etc.
How about the f-string?
Like the answer provided by #Aivar Paalberg. It's definitely fast and reliable. However, it's not at runtime, meaning that you have to know it's foo before you print the name out. But with varname, you don't have to know that variable is coming:
from varname import varname
def func():
return varname()
# In external uses
x = func() # 'x'
y = func() # 'y'
Finally
python-varname is not only able to detect the variable name from an assignment, but also:
Retrieve variable names directly, using nameof
Detect next immediate attribute name, using will
Fetch argument names/sources passed to a function using argname
Read more from its documentation.
However, the final word I want to say is that, try to avoid using it whenever you can.
Because you can't make sure that the client code will run in an environment where the source node is available or AST node is accessible. And of course, it costs resources to parse the source code, identify the environment, retrieve the AST nodes and evaluate them when needed.
On python3, this function will get the outer most name in the stack:
import inspect
def retrieve_name(var):
"""
Gets the name of var. Does it from the out most frame inner-wards.
:param var: variable to get name from.
:return: string
"""
for fi in reversed(inspect.stack()):
names = [var_name for var_name, var_val in fi.frame.f_locals.items() if var_val is var]
if len(names) > 0:
return names[0]
It is useful anywhere on the code. Traverses the reversed stack looking for the first match.
I don't believe this is possible. Consider the following example:
>>> a = []
>>> b = a
>>> id(a)
140031712435664
>>> id(b)
140031712435664
The a and b point to the same object, but the object can't know what variables point to it.
def name(**variables):
return [x for x in variables]
It's used like this:
name(variable=variable)
>> my_var = 5
>> my_var_name = [ k for k,v in locals().items() if v == my_var][0]
>> my_var_name
'my_var'
In case you get an error if myvar points to another variable, try this (suggested by #mherzog)-
>> my_var = 5
>> my_var_name = [ k for k,v in locals().items() if v is my_var][0]
>> my_var_name
'my_var'
locals() - Return a dictionary containing the current scope's local variables.
by iterating through this dictionary we can check the key which has a value equal to the defined variable, just extracting the key will give us the text of variable in string format.
from (after a bit changes)
https://www.tutorialspoint.com/How-to-get-a-variable-name-as-a-string-in-Python
I wrote the package sorcery to do this kind of magic robustly. You can write:
from sorcery import dict_of
columns = dict_of(n_jobs, users, queues, priorities)
and pass that to the dataframe constructor. It's equivalent to:
columns = dict(n_jobs=n_jobs, users=users, queues=queues, priorities=priorities)
Here's one approach. I wouldn't recommend this for anything important, because it'll be quite brittle. But it can be done.
Create a function that uses the inspect module to find the source code that called it. Then you can parse the source code to identify the variable names that you want to retrieve. For example, here's a function called autodict that takes a list of variables and returns a dictionary mapping variable names to their values. E.g.:
x = 'foo'
y = 'bar'
d = autodict(x, y)
print d
Would give:
{'x': 'foo', 'y': 'bar'}
Inspecting the source code itself is better than searching through the locals() or globals() because the latter approach doesn't tell you which of the variables are the ones you want.
At any rate, here's the code:
def autodict(*args):
get_rid_of = ['autodict(', ',', ')', '\n']
calling_code = inspect.getouterframes(inspect.currentframe())[1][4][0]
calling_code = calling_code[calling_code.index('autodict'):]
for garbage in get_rid_of:
calling_code = calling_code.replace(garbage, '')
var_names, var_values = calling_code.split(), args
dyn_dict = {var_name: var_value for var_name, var_value in
zip(var_names, var_values)}
return dyn_dict
The action happens in the line with inspect.getouterframes, which returns the string within the code that called autodict.
The obvious downside to this sort of magic is that it makes assumptions about how the source code is structured. And of course, it won't work at all if it's run inside the interpreter.
This function will print variable name with its value:
import inspect
def print_this(var):
callers_local_vars = inspect.currentframe().f_back.f_locals.items()
print(str([k for k, v in callers_local_vars if v is var][0])+': '+str(var))
***Input & Function call:***
my_var = 10
print_this(my_var)
***Output**:*
my_var: 10
>>> locals()['foo']
{}
>>> globals()['foo']
{}
If you wanted to write your own function, it could be done such that you could check for a variable defined in locals then check globals. If nothing is found you could compare on id() to see if the variable points to the same location in memory.
If your variable is in a class, you could use className.dict.keys() or vars(self) to see if your variable has been defined.
I have a method, and while not the most efficient...it works! (and it doesn't involve any fancy modules).
Basically it compares your Variable's ID to globals() Variables' IDs, then returns the match's name.
def getVariableName(variable, globalVariables=globals().copy()):
""" Get Variable Name as String by comparing its ID to globals() Variables' IDs
args:
variable(var): Variable to find name for (Obviously this variable has to exist)
kwargs:
globalVariables(dict): Copy of the globals() dict (Adding to Kwargs allows this function to work properly when imported from another .py)
"""
for globalVariable in globalVariables:
if id(variable) == id(globalVariables[globalVariable]): # If our Variable's ID matches this Global Variable's ID...
return globalVariable # Return its name from the Globals() dict
In Python, the def and class keywords will bind a specific name to the object they define (function or class). Similarly, modules are given a name by virtue of being called something specific in the filesystem. In all three cases, there's an obvious way to assign a "canonical" name to the object in question.
However, for other kinds of objects, such a canonical name may simply not exist. For example, consider the elements of a list. The elements in the list are not individually named, and it is entirely possible that the only way to refer to them in a program is by using list indices on the containing list. If such a list of objects was passed into your function, you could not possibly assign meaningful identifiers to the values.
Python doesn't save the name on the left hand side of an assignment into the assigned object because:
It would require figuring out which name was "canonical" among multiple conflicting objects,
It would make no sense for objects which are never assigned to an explicit variable name,
It would be extremely inefficient,
Literally no other language in existence does that.
So, for example, functions defined using lambda will always have the "name" <lambda>, rather than a specific function name.
The best approach would be simply to ask the caller to pass in an (optional) list of names. If typing the '...','...' is too cumbersome, you could accept e.g. a single string containing a comma-separated list of names (like namedtuple does).
I think it's so difficult to do this in Python because of the simple fact that you never will not know the name of the variable you're using. So, in his example, you could do:
Instead of:
list_of_dicts = [n_jobs, users, queues, priorities]
dict_of_dicts = {"n_jobs" : n_jobs, "users" : users, "queues" : queues, "priorities" : priorities}
Many of the answers return just one variable name. But that won't work well if more than one variable have the same value. Here's a variation of Amr Sharaki's answer which returns multiple results if more variables have the same value.
def getVariableNames(variable):
results = []
globalVariables=globals().copy()
for globalVariable in globalVariables:
if id(variable) == id(globalVariables[globalVariable]):
results.append(globalVariable)
return results
a = 1
b = 1
getVariableNames(a)
# ['a', 'b']
just another way to do this based on the content of input variable:
(it returns the name of the first variable that matches to the input variable, otherwise None. One can modify it to get all variable names which are having the same content as input variable)
def retrieve_name(x, Vars=vars()):
for k in Vars:
if isinstance(x, type(Vars[k])):
if x is Vars[k]:
return k
return None
If the goal is to help you keep track of your variables, you can write a simple function that labels the variable and returns its value and type. For example, suppose i_f=3.01 and you round it to an integer called i_n to use in a code, and then need a string i_s that will go into a report.
def whatis(string, x):
print(string+' value=',repr(x),type(x))
return string+' value='+repr(x)+repr(type(x))
i_f=3.01
i_n=int(i_f)
i_s=str(i_n)
i_l=[i_f, i_n, i_s]
i_u=(i_f, i_n, i_s)
## make report that identifies all types
report='\n'+20*'#'+'\nThis is the report:\n'
report+= whatis('i_f ',i_f)+'\n'
report+=whatis('i_n ',i_n)+'\n'
report+=whatis('i_s ',i_s)+'\n'
report+=whatis('i_l ',i_l)+'\n'
report+=whatis('i_u ',i_u)+'\n'
print(report)
This prints to the window at each call for debugging purposes and also yields a string for the written report. The only downside is that you have to type the variable twice each time you call the function.
I am a Python newbie and found this very useful way to log my efforts as I program and try to cope with all the objects in Python. One flaw is that whatis() fails if it calls a function described outside the procedure where it is used. For example, int(i_f) was a valid function call only because the int function is known to Python. You could call whatis() using int(i_f**2), but if for some strange reason you choose to define a function called int_squared it must be declared inside the procedure where whatis() is used.
Maybe this could be useful:
def Retriever(bar):
return (list(globals().keys()))[list(map(lambda x: id(x), list(globals().values()))).index(id(bar))]
The function goes through the list of IDs of values from the global scope (the namespace could be edited), finds the index of the wanted/required var or function based on its ID, and then returns the name from the list of global names based on the acquired index.
Whenever I have to do it, mostly while communicating json schema and constants with the frontend I define a class as follows
class Param:
def __init__(self, name, value):
self.name = name
self.value = value
Then define the variable with name and value.
frame_folder_count = Param({'name':'frame_folder_count', 'value':10})
Now you can access the name and value using the object.
>>> frame_folder_count.name
'frame_folder_count'
>>> def varname(v, scope=None):
d = globals() if not scope else vars(scope); return [k for k in d if d[k] == v]
...
>>> d1 = {'a': 'ape'}; d2 = {'b': 'bear'}; d3 = {'c': 'cat'}
>>> ld = [d1, d2, d3]
>>> [varname(d) for d in ld]
[['d1'], ['d2'], ['d3']]
>>> d5 = d3
>>> [varname(d) for d in ld]
[['d1'], ['d2'], ['d3', 'd5']]
>>> def varname(v, scope=None):
d = globals() if not scope else vars(scope); return [k for k in d if d[k] is v]
...
>>> [varname(d) for d in ld]
[['d1'], ['d2'], ['d3', 'd5']]
As you see and is noted here, there can be multiple variables with the same value or even address, so using a wrapper to keep the names with the data is best.
Following method will not return the name of variable but using this method you can create data frame easily if variable is available in global scope.
class CustomDict(dict):
def __add__(self, other):
return CustomDict({**self, **other})
class GlobalBase(type):
def __getattr__(cls, key):
return CustomDict({key: globals()[key]})
def __getitem__(cls, keys):
return CustomDict({key: globals()[key] for key in keys})
class G(metaclass=GlobalBase):
pass
x, y, z = 0, 1, 2
print('method 1:', G['x', 'y', 'z']) # Outcome: method 1: {'x': 0, 'y': 1, 'z': 2}
print('method 2:', G.x + G.y + G.z) # Outcome: method 2: {'x': 0, 'y': 1, 'z': 2}
A = [0, 1]
B = [1, 2]
pd.DataFrame(G.A + G.B) # It will return a data frame with A and B columns
Some of the previous cases would fail if there are two variables with the same value. So it is convenient to alert it:
Defining function:
# Variable to string of variable name
def var_name(variable,i=0):
results = []
for name in globals():
if eval(name) == variable:
results.append(name)
if len(results) > 1:
print('Warning:' )
print(' var_name() has found',len(results), 'possible outcomes.')
print(' Please choose the suitable parameter "i". Where "i" is the index')
print(' that matches your choice from the list below.')
print(' ',results) ; print('')
return results[i]
Use:
var_1 = 10
var_name(var_1) # Output will be "var_1"
If you have 2 variables with the same value like var_1 = 8 and var_2 = 8, then a warning will appear.
var_1 = 8
var_2 = 8
var_name(var_2) # Output will be "var_1" too but Warning will appear
You can get your variable as kwargs and return it as string:
var=2
def getVarName(**kwargs):
return list(kwargs.keys())[0]
print (getVarName(var = var))
Note: variable name must be equal to itself.
I try to get name from inspect locals, but it cann't process var likes a[1], b.val.
After it, I got a new idea --- get var name from the code, and I try it succ!
code like below:
#direct get from called function code
def retrieve_name_ex(var):
stacks = inspect.stack()
try:
func = stacks[0].function
code = stacks[1].code_context[0]
s = code.index(func)
s = code.index("(", s + len(func)) + 1
e = code.index(")", s)
return code[s:e].strip()
except:
return ""
You can try the following to retrieve the name of a function you defined (does not work for built-in functions though):
import re
def retrieve_name(func):
return re.match("<function\s+(\w+)\s+at.*", str(func)).group(1)
def foo(x):
return x**2
print(retrieve_name(foo))
# foo
When finding the name of a variable from its value,
you may have several variables equal to the same value,
for example var1 = 'hello' and var2 = 'hello'.
My solution:
def find_var_name(val):
dict_list = []
global_dict = dict(globals())
for k, v in global_dict.items():
dict_list.append([k, v])
return [item[0] for item in dict_list if item[1] == val]
var1 = 'hello'
var2 = 'hello'
find_var_name('hello')
Outputs
['var1', 'var2']
Compressed version of iDilip's answer:
import inspect
def varname(x):
return [k for k,v in inspect.currentframe().f_back.f_locals.items() if v is x][0]
hi = 123
print(varname(hi))
It's totally possible to get the name of an instance variable, so long as it is the property of a class.
I got this from Effective Python by Brett Slatkin. Hope it helps someone:
The class must implement the get, set, and set_name dunder methods, which are part of the "Descriptor Protocol"
This worked when I ran it:
class FieldThatKnowsItsName():
def __init__(self):
self.name = None
self._value= None
self.owner = None
def __set_name__(self, owner, name):
self.name = name
self.owner = owner
self.owner.fields[self.name] = self
def __get__(self, instance, instance_type):
return self
def __set__(self, instance, value):
self = value
class SuperTable:
fields = {}
field_1=FieldThatKnowsItsName()
field_2=FieldThatKnowsItsName()
table = SuperTable()
print(table.field_1.name)
print(table.field_2.name)
You can then add methods and or extend your datatype as you like.
As a bonus, the set_name(self, owner, name) dunder also passes the parent instance, so the Field class instance can register itself with the parent.
I got this from Effective Python by Brett Slatkin. It took a while to figure out how to implement.
How can I do the same for a variable? As opposed to functions, Python variables do not have the __name__ attribute.
The problem comes up because you are confused about terminology, semantics or both.
"variables" don't belong in the same category as "functions". A "variable" is not a thing that takes up space in memory while the code is running. It is just a name that exists in your source code - so that when you're writing the code, you can explain which thing you're talking about. Python uses names in the source code to refer to (i.e., give a name to) values. (In many languages, a variable is more like a name for a specific location in memory where the value will be stored. But Python's names actually name the thing in question.)
In Python, a function is a value. (In some languages, this is not the case; although there are bytes of memory used to represent the actual executable code, it isn't a discrete chunk of memory that your program logic gets to interact with directly.) In Python, every value is an object, meaning that you can assign names to it freely, pass it as an argument, return it from a function, etc. (In many languages, this is not the case.) Objects in Python have attributes, which are the things you access using the . syntax. Functions in Python have a __name__ attribute, which is assigned when the function is created. Specifically, when a def statement is executed (in most languages, creation of a function works quite differently), the name that appears after def is used as a value for the __name__ attribute, and also, independently, as a variable name that will get the function object assigned to it.
But most objects don't have an attribute like that.
In other words, if I have a variable such as:
That's the thing: you don't "have" the variable in the sense that you're thinking of. You have the object that is named by that variable. Anything else depends on the information incidentally being stored in some other object - such as the locals() of the enclosing function. But it would be better to store the information yourself. Instead of relying on a variable name to carry information for you, explicitly build the mapping between the string name you want to use for the object, and the object itself.
I'm new to Python, and am sort of surprised I cannot do this.
dictionary = {
'a' : '123',
'b' : dictionary['a'] + '456'
}
I'm wondering what the Pythonic way to correctly do this in my script, because I feel like I'm not the only one that has tried to do this.
EDIT: Enough people were wondering what I'm doing with this, so here are more details for my use cases. Lets say I want to keep dictionary objects to hold file system paths. The paths are relative to other values in the dictionary. For example, this is what one of my dictionaries may look like.
dictionary = {
'user': 'sholsapp',
'home': '/home/' + dictionary['user']
}
It is important that at any point in time I may change dictionary['user'] and have all of the dictionaries values reflect the change. Again, this is an example of what I'm using it for, so I hope that it conveys my goal.
From my own research I think I will need to implement a class to do this.
No fear of creating new classes -
You can take advantage of Python's string formating capabilities
and simply do:
class MyDict(dict):
def __getitem__(self, item):
return dict.__getitem__(self, item) % self
dictionary = MyDict({
'user' : 'gnucom',
'home' : '/home/%(user)s',
'bin' : '%(home)s/bin'
})
print dictionary["home"]
print dictionary["bin"]
Nearest I came up without doing object:
dictionary = {
'user' : 'gnucom',
'home' : lambda:'/home/'+dictionary['user']
}
print dictionary['home']()
dictionary['user']='tony'
print dictionary['home']()
>>> dictionary = {
... 'a':'123'
... }
>>> dictionary['b'] = dictionary['a'] + '456'
>>> dictionary
{'a': '123', 'b': '123456'}
It works fine but when you're trying to use dictionary it hasn't been defined yet (because it has to evaluate that literal dictionary first).
But be careful because this assigns to the key of 'b' the value referenced by the key of 'a' at the time of assignment and is not going to do the lookup every time. If that is what you are looking for, it's possible but with more work.
What you're describing in your edit is how an INI config file works. Python does have a built in library called ConfigParser which should work for what you're describing.
This is an interesting problem. It seems like Greg has a good solution. But that's no fun ;)
jsbueno as a very elegant solution but that only applies to strings (as you requested).
The trick to a 'general' self referential dictionary is to use a surrogate object. It takes a few (understatement) lines of code to pull off, but the usage is about what you want:
S = SurrogateDict(AdditionSurrogateDictEntry)
d = S.resolve({'user': 'gnucom',
'home': '/home/' + S['user'],
'config': [S['home'] + '/.emacs', S['home'] + '/.bashrc']})
The code to make that happen is not nearly so short. It lives in three classes:
import abc
class SurrogateDictEntry(object):
__metaclass__ = abc.ABCMeta
def __init__(self, key):
"""record the key on the real dictionary that this will resolve to a
value for
"""
self.key = key
def resolve(self, d):
""" return the actual value"""
if hasattr(self, 'op'):
# any operation done on self will store it's name in self.op.
# if this is set, resolve it by calling the appropriate method
# now that we can get self.value out of d
self.value = d[self.key]
return getattr(self, self.op + 'resolve__')()
else:
return d[self.key]
#staticmethod
def make_op(opname):
"""A convience class. This will be the form of all op hooks for subclasses
The actual logic for the op is in __op__resolve__ (e.g. __add__resolve__)
"""
def op(self, other):
self.stored_value = other
self.op = opname
return self
op.__name__ = opname
return op
Next, comes the concrete class. simple enough.
class AdditionSurrogateDictEntry(SurrogateDictEntry):
__add__ = SurrogateDictEntry.make_op('__add__')
__radd__ = SurrogateDictEntry.make_op('__radd__')
def __add__resolve__(self):
return self.value + self.stored_value
def __radd__resolve__(self):
return self.stored_value + self.value
Here's the final class
class SurrogateDict(object):
def __init__(self, EntryClass):
self.EntryClass = EntryClass
def __getitem__(self, key):
"""record the key and return"""
return self.EntryClass(key)
#staticmethod
def resolve(d):
"""I eat generators resolve self references"""
stack = [d]
while stack:
cur = stack.pop()
# This just tries to set it to an appropriate iterable
it = xrange(len(cur)) if not hasattr(cur, 'keys') else cur.keys()
for key in it:
# sorry for being a duche. Just register your class with
# SurrogateDictEntry and you can pass whatever.
while isinstance(cur[key], SurrogateDictEntry):
cur[key] = cur[key].resolve(d)
# I'm just going to check for iter but you can add other
# checks here for items that we should loop over.
if hasattr(cur[key], '__iter__'):
stack.append(cur[key])
return d
In response to gnucoms's question about why I named the classes the way that I did.
The word surrogate is generally associated with standing in for something else so it seemed appropriate because that's what the SurrogateDict class does: an instance replaces the 'self' references in a dictionary literal. That being said, (other than just being straight up stupid sometimes) naming is probably one of the hardest things for me about coding. If you (or anyone else) can suggest a better name, I'm all ears.
I'll provide a brief explanation. Throughout S refers to an instance of SurrogateDict and d is the real dictionary.
A reference S[key] triggers S.__getitem__ and SurrogateDictEntry(key) to be placed in the d.
When S[key] = SurrogateDictEntry(key) is constructed, it stores key. This will be the key into d for the value that this entry of SurrogateDictEntry is acting as a surrogate for.
After S[key] is returned, it is either entered into the d, or has some operation(s) performed on it. If an operation is performed on it, it triggers the relative __op__ method which simple stores the value that the operation is performed on and the name of the operation and then returns itself. We can't actually resolve the operation because d hasn't been constructed yet.
After d is constructed, it is passed to S.resolve. This method loops through d finding any instances of SurrogateDictEntry and replacing them with the result of calling the resolve method on the instance.
The SurrogateDictEntry.resolve method receives the now constructed d as an argument and can use the value of key that it stored at construction time to get the value that it is acting as a surrogate for. If an operation was performed on it after creation, the op attribute will have been set with the name of the operation that was performed. If the class has a __op__ method, then it has a __op__resolve__ method with the actual logic that would normally be in the __op__ method. So now we have the logic (self.op__resolve) and all necessary values (self.value, self.stored_value) to finally get the real value of d[key]. So we return that which step 4 places in the dictionary.
finally the SurrogateDict.resolve method returns d with all references resolved.
That'a a rough sketch. If you have any more questions, feel free to ask.
If you, just like me wandering how to make #jsbueno snippet work with {} style substitutions, below is the example code (which is probably not much efficient though):
import string
class MyDict(dict):
def __init__(self, *args, **kw):
super(MyDict,self).__init__(*args, **kw)
self.itemlist = super(MyDict,self).keys()
self.fmt = string.Formatter()
def __getitem__(self, item):
return self.fmt.vformat(dict.__getitem__(self, item), {}, self)
xs = MyDict({
'user' : 'gnucom',
'home' : '/home/{user}',
'bin' : '{home}/bin'
})
>>> xs["home"]
'/home/gnucom'
>>> xs["bin"]
'/home/gnucom/bin'
I tried to make it work with the simple replacement of % self with .format(**self) but it turns out it wouldn't work for nested expressions (like 'bin' in above listing, which references 'home', which has it's own reference to 'user') because of the evaluation order (** expansion is done before actual format call and it's not delayed like in original % version).
Write a class, maybe something with properties:
class PathInfo(object):
def __init__(self, user):
self.user = user
#property
def home(self):
return '/home/' + self.user
p = PathInfo('thc')
print p.home # /home/thc
As sort of an extended version of #Tony's answer, you could build a dictionary subclass that calls its values if they are callables:
class CallingDict(dict):
"""Returns the result rather than the value of referenced callables.
>>> cd = CallingDict({1: "One", 2: "Two", 'fsh': "Fish",
... "rhyme": lambda d: ' '.join((d[1], d['fsh'],
... d[2], d['fsh']))})
>>> cd["rhyme"]
'One Fish Two Fish'
>>> cd[1] = 'Red'
>>> cd[2] = 'Blue'
>>> cd["rhyme"]
'Red Fish Blue Fish'
"""
def __getitem__(self, item):
it = super(CallingDict, self).__getitem__(item)
if callable(it):
return it(self)
else:
return it
Of course this would only be usable if you're not actually going to store callables as values. If you need to be able to do that, you could wrap the lambda declaration in a function that adds some attribute to the resulting lambda, and check for it in CallingDict.__getitem__, but at that point it's getting complex, and long-winded, enough that it might just be easier to use a class for your data in the first place.
This is very easy in a lazily evaluated language (haskell).
Since Python is strictly evaluated, we can do a little trick to turn things lazy:
Y = lambda f: (lambda x: x(x))(lambda y: f(lambda *args: y(y)(*args)))
d1 = lambda self: lambda: {
'a': lambda: 3,
'b': lambda: self()['a']()
}
# fix the d1, and evaluate it
d2 = Y(d1)()
# to get a
d2['a']() # 3
# to get b
d2['b']() # 3
Syntax wise this is not very nice. That's because of us needing to explicitly construct lazy expressions with lambda: ... and explicitly evaluate lazy expression with ...(). It's the opposite problem in lazy languages needing strictness annotations, here in Python we end up needing lazy annotations.
I think with some more meta-programmming and some more tricks, the above could be made more easy to use.
Note that this is basically how let-rec works in some functional languages.
The jsbueno answer in Python 3 :
class MyDict(dict):
def __getitem__(self, item):
return dict.__getitem__(self, item).format(self)
dictionary = MyDict({
'user' : 'gnucom',
'home' : '/home/{0[user]}',
'bin' : '{0[home]}/bin'
})
print(dictionary["home"])
print(dictionary["bin"])
Her ewe use the python 3 string formatting with curly braces {} and the .format() method.
Documentation : https://docs.python.org/3/library/string.html
I would like to convert a python variable name into the string equivalent as shown. Any ideas how?
var = {}
print ??? # Would like to see 'var'
something_else = 3
print ??? # Would print 'something_else'
TL;DR: Not possible. See 'conclusion' at the end.
There is an usage scenario where you might need this. I'm not implying there are not better ways or achieving the same functionality.
This would be useful in order to 'dump' an arbitrary list of dictionaries in case of error, in debug modes and other similar situations.
What would be needed, is the reverse of the eval() function:
get_indentifier_name_missing_function()
which would take an identifier name ('variable','dictionary',etc) as an argument, and return a
string containing the identifier’s name.
Consider the following current state of affairs:
random_function(argument_data)
If one is passing an identifier name ('function','variable','dictionary',etc) argument_data to a random_function() (another identifier name), one actually passes an identifier (e.g.: <argument_data object at 0xb1ce10>) to another identifier (e.g.: <function random_function at 0xafff78>):
<function random_function at 0xafff78>(<argument_data object at 0xb1ce10>)
From my understanding, only the memory address is passed to the function:
<function at 0xafff78>(<object at 0xb1ce10>)
Therefore, one would need to pass a string as an argument to random_function() in order for that function to have the argument's identifier name:
random_function('argument_data')
Inside the random_function()
def random_function(first_argument):
, one would use the already supplied string 'argument_data' to:
serve as an 'identifier name' (to display, log, string split/concat, whatever)
feed the eval() function in order to get a reference to the actual identifier, and therefore, a reference to the real data:
print("Currently working on", first_argument)
some_internal_var = eval(first_argument)
print("here comes the data: " + str(some_internal_var))
Unfortunately, this doesn't work in all cases. It only works if the random_function() can resolve the 'argument_data' string to an actual identifier. I.e. If argument_data identifier name is available in the random_function()'s namespace.
This isn't always the case:
# main1.py
import some_module1
argument_data = 'my data'
some_module1.random_function('argument_data')
# some_module1.py
def random_function(first_argument):
print("Currently working on", first_argument)
some_internal_var = eval(first_argument)
print("here comes the data: " + str(some_internal_var))
######
Expected results would be:
Currently working on: argument_data
here comes the data: my data
Because argument_data identifier name is not available in the random_function()'s namespace, this would yield instead:
Currently working on argument_data
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "~/main1.py", line 6, in <module>
some_module1.random_function('argument_data')
File "~/some_module1.py", line 4, in random_function
some_internal_var = eval(first_argument)
File "<string>", line 1, in <module>
NameError: name 'argument_data' is not defined
Now, consider the hypotetical usage of a get_indentifier_name_missing_function() which would behave as described above.
Here's a dummy Python 3.0 code: .
# main2.py
import some_module2
some_dictionary_1 = { 'definition_1':'text_1',
'definition_2':'text_2',
'etc':'etc.' }
some_other_dictionary_2 = { 'key_3':'value_3',
'key_4':'value_4',
'etc':'etc.' }
#
# more such stuff
#
some_other_dictionary_n = { 'random_n':'random_n',
'etc':'etc.' }
for each_one_of_my_dictionaries in ( some_dictionary_1,
some_other_dictionary_2,
...,
some_other_dictionary_n ):
some_module2.some_function(each_one_of_my_dictionaries)
# some_module2.py
def some_function(a_dictionary_object):
for _key, _value in a_dictionary_object.items():
print( get_indentifier_name_missing_function(a_dictionary_object) +
" " +
str(_key) +
" = " +
str(_value) )
######
Expected results would be:
some_dictionary_1 definition_1 = text_1
some_dictionary_1 definition_2 = text_2
some_dictionary_1 etc = etc.
some_other_dictionary_2 key_3 = value_3
some_other_dictionary_2 key_4 = value_4
some_other_dictionary_2 etc = etc.
......
......
......
some_other_dictionary_n random_n = random_n
some_other_dictionary_n etc = etc.
Unfortunately, get_indentifier_name_missing_function() would not see the 'original' identifier names (some_dictionary_,some_other_dictionary_2,some_other_dictionary_n). It would only see the a_dictionary_object identifier name.
Therefore the real result would rather be:
a_dictionary_object definition_1 = text_1
a_dictionary_object definition_2 = text_2
a_dictionary_object etc = etc.
a_dictionary_object key_3 = value_3
a_dictionary_object key_4 = value_4
a_dictionary_object etc = etc.
......
......
......
a_dictionary_object random_n = random_n
a_dictionary_object etc = etc.
So, the reverse of the eval() function won't be that useful in this case.
Currently, one would need to do this:
# main2.py same as above, except:
for each_one_of_my_dictionaries_names in ( 'some_dictionary_1',
'some_other_dictionary_2',
'...',
'some_other_dictionary_n' ):
some_module2.some_function( { each_one_of_my_dictionaries_names :
eval(each_one_of_my_dictionaries_names) } )
# some_module2.py
def some_function(a_dictionary_name_object_container):
for _dictionary_name, _dictionary_object in a_dictionary_name_object_container.items():
for _key, _value in _dictionary_object.items():
print( str(_dictionary_name) +
" " +
str(_key) +
" = " +
str(_value) )
######
In conclusion:
Python passes only memory addresses as arguments to functions.
Strings representing the name of an identifier, can only be referenced back to the actual identifier by the eval() function if the name identifier is available in the current namespace.
A hypothetical reverse of the eval() function, would not be useful in cases where the identifier name is not 'seen' directly by the calling code. E.g. inside any called function.
Currently one needs to pass to a function:
the string representing the identifier name
the actual identifier (memory address)
This can be achieved by passing both the 'string' and eval('string') to the called function at the same time. I think this is the most 'general' way of solving this egg-chicken problem across arbitrary functions, modules, namespaces, without using corner-case solutions. The only downside is the use of the eval() function which may easily lead to unsecured code. Care must be taken to not feed the eval() function with just about anything, especially unfiltered external-input data.
Totally possible with the python-varname package (python3):
from varname import nameof
s = 'Hey!'
print (nameof(s))
Output:
s
Install:
pip3 install varname
Or get the package here:
https://github.com/pwwang/python-varname
I searched for this question because I wanted a Python program to print assignment statements for some of the variables in the program. For example, it might print "foo = 3, bar = 21, baz = 432". The print function would need the variable names in string form. I could have provided my code with the strings "foo","bar", and "baz", but that felt like repeating myself. After reading the previous answers, I developed the solution below.
The globals() function behaves like a dict with variable names (in the form of strings) as keys. I wanted to retrieve from globals() the key corresponding to the value of each variable. The method globals().items() returns a list of tuples; in each tuple the first item is the variable name (as a string) and the second is the variable value. My variablename() function searches through that list to find the variable name(s) that corresponds to the value of the variable whose name I need in string form.
The function itertools.ifilter() does the search by testing each tuple in the globals().items() list with the function lambda x: var is globals()[x[0]]. In that function x is the tuple being tested; x[0] is the variable name (as a string) and x[1] is the value. The lambda function tests whether the value of the tested variable is the same as the value of the variable passed to variablename(). In fact, by using the is operator, the lambda function tests whether the name of the tested variable is bound to the exact same object as the variable passed to variablename(). If so, the tuple passes the test and is returned by ifilter().
The itertools.ifilter() function actually returns an iterator which doesn't return any results until it is called properly. To get it called properly, I put it inside a list comprehension [tpl[0] for tpl ... globals().items())]. The list comprehension saves only the variable name tpl[0], ignoring the variable value. The list that is created contains one or more names (as strings) that are bound to the value of the variable passed to variablename().
In the uses of variablename() shown below, the desired string is returned as an element in a list. In many cases, it will be the only item in the list. If another variable name is assigned the same value, however, the list will be longer.
>>> def variablename(var):
... import itertools
... return [tpl[0] for tpl in
... itertools.ifilter(lambda x: var is x[1], globals().items())]
...
>>> var = {}
>>> variablename(var)
['var']
>>> something_else = 3
>>> variablename(something_else)
['something_else']
>>> yet_another = 3
>>> variablename(something_else)
['yet_another', 'something_else']
as long as it's a variable and not a second class, this here works for me:
def print_var_name(variable):
for name in globals():
if eval(name) == variable:
print name
foo = 123
print_var_name(foo)
>>>foo
this happens for class members:
class xyz:
def __init__(self):
pass
member = xyz()
print_var_name(member)
>>>member
ans this for classes (as example):
abc = xyz
print_var_name(abc)
>>>abc
>>>xyz
So for classes it gives you the name AND the properteries
This is not possible.
In Python, there really isn't any such thing as a "variable". What Python really has are "names" which can have objects bound to them. It makes no difference to the object what names, if any, it might be bound to. It might be bound to dozens of different names, or none.
Consider this example:
foo = 1
bar = 1
baz = 1
Now, suppose you have the integer object with value 1, and you want to work backwards and find its name. What would you print? Three different names have that object bound to them, and all are equally valid.
In Python, a name is a way to access an object, so there is no way to work with names directly. There might be some clever way to hack the Python bytecodes or something to get the value of the name, but that is at best a parlor trick.
If you know you want print foo to print "foo", you might as well just execute print "foo" in the first place.
EDIT: I have changed the wording slightly to make this more clear. Also, here is an even better example:
foo = 1
bar = foo
baz = foo
In practice, Python reuses the same object for integers with common values like 0 or 1, so the first example should bind the same object to all three names. But this example is crystal clear: the same object is bound to foo, bar, and baz.
Technically the information is available to you, but as others have asked, how would you make use of it in a sensible way?
>>> x = 52
>>> globals()
{'__builtins__': <module '__builtin__' (built-in)>, '__name__': '__main__',
'x': 52, '__doc__': None, '__package__': None}
This shows that the variable name is present as a string in the globals() dictionary.
>>> globals().keys()[2]
'x'
In this case it happens to be the third key, but there's no reliable way to know where a given variable name will end up
>>> for k in globals().keys():
... if not k.startswith("_"):
... print k
...
x
>>>
You could filter out system variables like this, but you're still going to get all of your own items. Just running that code above created another variable "k" that changed the position of "x" in the dict.
But maybe this is a useful start for you. If you tell us what you want this capability for, more helpful information could possibly be given.
By using the the unpacking operator:
>>> def tostr(**kwargs):
return kwargs
>>> var = {}
>>> something_else = 3
>>> tostr(var = var,something_else=something_else)
{'var' = {},'something_else'=3}
You somehow have to refer to the variable you want to print the name of. So it would look like:
print varname(something_else)
There is no such function, but if there were it would be kind of pointless. You have to type out something_else, so you can as well just type quotes to the left and right of it to print the name as a string:
print "something_else"
What are you trying to achieve? There is absolutely no reason to ever do what you describe, and there is likely a much better solution to the problem you're trying to solve..
The most obvious alternative to what you request is a dictionary. For example:
>>> my_data = {'var': 'something'}
>>> my_data['something_else'] = 'something'
>>> print my_data.keys()
['var', 'something_else']
>>> print my_data['var']
something
Mostly as a.. challenge, I implemented your desired output. Do not use this code, please!
#!/usr/bin/env python2.6
class NewLocals:
"""Please don't ever use this code.."""
def __init__(self, initial_locals):
self.prev_locals = list(initial_locals.keys())
def show_new(self, new_locals):
output = ", ".join(list(set(new_locals) - set(self.prev_locals)))
self.prev_locals = list(new_locals.keys())
return output
# Set up
eww = None
eww = NewLocals(locals())
# "Working" requested code
var = {}
print eww.show_new(locals()) # Outputs: var
something_else = 3
print eww.show_new(locals()) # Outputs: something_else
# Further testing
another_variable = 4
and_a_final_one = 5
print eww.show_new(locals()) # Outputs: another_variable, and_a_final_one
Does Django not do this when generating field names?
http://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev//topics/db/models/#verbose-field-names
Seems reasonable to me.
I think this is a cool solution and I suppose the best you can get. But do you see any way to handle the ambigious results, your function may return?
As "is" operator behaves unexpectedly with integers shows, low integers and strings of the same value get cached by python so that your variablename-function might priovide ambigous results with a high probability.
In my case, I would like to create a decorator, that adds a new variable to a class by the varialbename i pass it:
def inject(klass, dependency):
klass.__dict__["__"+variablename(dependency)]=dependency
But if your method returns ambigous results, how can I know the name of the variable I added?
var any_var="myvarcontent"
var myvar="myvarcontent"
#inject(myvar)
class myclasss():
def myclass_method(self):
print self.__myvar #I can not be sure, that this variable will be set...
Maybe if I will also check the local list I could at least remove the "dependency"-Variable from the list, but this will not be a reliable result.
Here is a succinct variation that lets you specify any directory.
The issue with using directories to find anything is that multiple variables can have the same value. So this code returns a list of possible variables.
def varname( var, dir=locals()):
return [ key for key, val in dir.items() if id( val) == id( var)]
I don't know it's right or not, but it worked for me
def varname(variable):
for name in list(globals().keys()):
expression = f'id({name})'
if id(variable) == eval(expression):
return name
it is possible to a limited extent. the answer is similar to the solution by #tamtam .
The given example assumes the following assumptions -
You are searching for a variable by its value
The variable has a distinct value
The value is in the global namespace
Example:
testVar = "unique value"
varNameAsString = [k for k,v in globals().items() if v == "unique value"]
#
# the variable "varNameAsString" will contain all the variable name that matches
# the value "unique value"
# for this example, it will be a list of a single entry "testVar"
#
print(varNameAsString)
Output : ['testVar']
You can extend this example for any other variable/data type
I'd like to point out a use case for this that is not an anti-pattern, and there is no better way to do it.
This seems to be a missing feature in python.
There are a number of functions, like patch.object, that take the name of a method or property to be patched or accessed.
Consider this:
patch.object(obj, "method_name", new_reg)
This can potentially start "false succeeding" when you change the name of a method. IE: you can ship a bug, you thought you were testing.... simply because of a bad method name refactor.
Now consider: varname. This could be an efficient, built-in function. But for now it can work by iterating an object or the caller's frame:
Now your call can be:
patch.member(obj, obj.method_name, new_reg)
And the patch function can call:
varname(var, obj=obj)
This would: assert that the var is bound to the obj and return the name of the member. Or if the obj is not specified, use the callers stack frame to derive it, etc.
Could be made an efficient built in at some point, but here's a definition that works. I deliberately didn't support builtins, easy to add tho:
Feel free to stick this in a package called varname.py, and use it in your patch.object calls:
patch.object(obj, varname(obj, obj.method_name), new_reg)
Note: this was written for python 3.
import inspect
def _varname_dict(var, dct):
key_name = None
for key, val in dct.items():
if val is var:
if key_name is not None:
raise NotImplementedError("Duplicate names not supported %s, %s" % (key_name, key))
key_name = key
return key_name
def _varname_obj(var, obj):
key_name = None
for key in dir(obj):
val = getattr(obj, key)
equal = val is var
if equal:
if key_name is not None:
raise NotImplementedError("Duplicate names not supported %s, %s" % (key_name, key))
key_name = key
return key_name
def varname(var, obj=None):
if obj is None:
if hasattr(var, "__self__"):
return var.__name__
caller_frame = inspect.currentframe().f_back
try:
ret = _varname_dict(var, caller_frame.f_locals)
except NameError:
ret = _varname_dict(var, caller_frame.f_globals)
else:
ret = _varname_obj(var, obj)
if ret is None:
raise NameError("Name not found. (Note: builtins not supported)")
return ret
This will work for simnple data types (str, int, float, list etc.)
>>> def my_print(var_str) :
print var_str+':', globals()[var_str]
>>> a = 5
>>> b = ['hello', ',world!']
>>> my_print('a')
a: 5
>>> my_print('b')
b: ['hello', ',world!']
It's not very Pythonesque but I was curious and found this solution. You need to duplicate the globals dictionary since its size will change as soon as you define a new variable.
def var_to_name(var):
# noinspection PyTypeChecker
dict_vars = dict(globals().items())
var_string = None
for name in dict_vars.keys():
if dict_vars[name] is var:
var_string = name
break
return var_string
if __name__ == "__main__":
test = 3
print(f"test = {test}")
print(f"variable name: {var_to_name(test)}")
which returns:
test = 3
variable name: test
To get the variable name of var as a string:
var = 1000
var_name = [k for k,v in locals().items() if v == var][0]
print(var_name) # ---> outputs 'var'
Thanks #restrepo, this was exactly what I needed to create a standard save_df_to_file() function. For this, I made some small changes to your tostr() function. Hope this will help someone else:
def variabletostr(**df):
variablename = list(df.keys())[0]
return variablename
variabletostr(df=0)
The original question is pretty old, but I found an almost solution with Python 3. (I say almost because I think you can get close to a solution but I do not believe there is a solution concrete enough to satisfy the exact request).
First, you might want to consider the following:
objects are a core concept in Python, and they may be assigned a variable, but the variable itself is a bound name (think pointer or reference) not the object itself
var is just a variable name bound to an object and that object could have more than one reference (in your example it does not seem to)
in this case, var appears to be in the global namespace so you can use the global builtin conveniently named global
different name references to the same object will all share the same id which can be checked by running the id builtin id like so: id(var)
This function grabs the global variables and filters out the ones matching the content of your variable.
def get_bound_names(target_variable):
'''Returns a list of bound object names.'''
return [k for k, v in globals().items() if v is target_variable]
The real challenge here is that you are not guaranteed to get back the variable name by itself. It will be a list, but that list will contain the variable name you are looking for. If your target variable (bound to an object) is really the only bound name, you could access it this way:
bound_names = get_variable_names(target_variable)
var_string = bound_names[0]
Possible for Python >= 3.8 (with f'{var=}' string )
Not sure if this could be used in production code, but in Python 3.8(and up) you can use f' string debugging specifier. Add = at the end of an expression, and it will print both the expression and its value:
my_salary_variable = 5000
print(f'{my_salary_variable = }')
Output:
my_salary_variable = 5000
To uncover this magic here is another example:
param_list = f'{my_salary_variable=}'.split('=')
print(param_list)
Output:
['my_salary_variable', '5000']
Explanation: when you put '=' after your var in f'string, it returns a string with variable name, '=' and its value. Split it with .split('=') and get a List of 2 strings, [0] - your_variable_name, and [1] - actual object of variable.
Pick up [0] element of the list if you need variable name only.
my_salary_variable = 5000
param_list = f'{my_salary_variable=}'.split('=')
print(param_list[0])
Output:
my_salary_variable
or, in one line
my_salary_variable = 5000
print(f'{my_salary_variable=}'.split('=')[0])
Output:
my_salary_variable
Works with functions too:
def my_super_calc_foo(number):
return number**3
print(f'{my_super_calc_foo(5) = }')
print(f'{my_super_calc_foo(5)=}'.split('='))
Output:
my_super_calc_foo(5) = 125
['my_super_calc_foo(5)', '125']
Process finished with exit code 0
This module works for converting variables names to a string:
https://pypi.org/project/varname/
Use it like this:
from varname import nameof
variable=0
name=nameof(variable)
print(name)
//output: variable
Install it by:
pip install varname
print "var"
print "something_else"
Or did you mean something_else?