Develop Reference

Run for loop over subsets in Python

Can you run a for loop over the names of multiple subsets?
For instance, I now have subsets dfVC1 up until dfVC20 and I would like to do something like:
for x in range(20):
print(dfVC[x])
I get this doesn't work... but wonder if there is a way to do this.

I'm going to assume your 'subsets' in this case are variables, named dbVC0, dbVC1, etc. Then, your problem is that you want to print all of them by number, but since they're variables, you can't.
One way to solve this would be to change how the 'subsets' are declared. Instead of
dfVC0 = ...
dfVC1 = ...
you could make one dfVC variable that's a dict, that holds all the others at their proper indices.
dfVC = {}
dfVC[0] = ...
dfVC[1] = ...
which would then allow you to access the various dbVC subsets in the way you're currently trying to.
But changing such a large part of the program isn't always possible. What you might be able to do instead is to figure out which object the dfVCs are attached to, and grab them by string.
If they're in the local namespace (i.e. were declared in the same function as you're currently executing in), you can call the built-in locals() to get a dict that you can then try to find your key in:
for x in range(20):
sname = f'dfVC{x}'
print(locals()[sname])
globals() can be used similarly, if your 'subsets' are in the global scope (i.e. declared outside of the current function).
And if your dfVC variables are attached to a class or module (or something else that behaves like a namespace), you can retrieve them using the built-in getattr() function:
for x in range(20):
sname = f'dfVC{x}'
print(getattr(self, sname)) # replace self with whichever object has the dbVC attached to it

Python - Dynamically created dictionary can't be returned or added to another dictionary

I've got a function that dynamically creates some number of dictionaries. What I'm trying to do, is to add each of those dictionaries to another dictionary, and then return that dictionary of dictionaries.
The dictionaries are all created just fine. I've stepped through the process and inspected the variables, it all looks good.
But when I try to add them to another dictionary (as a value), all that gets added is None.
I think this might have something to do with global and local variables, but I'm not sure.
This is the code that creates the dictionaries inside the function
def build_DoD(block, page, PROJECT, master_string, logging):
# other code up here
exec("{} = {{}}".format(base))
exec("{0}['section'] = '{1}'".format(base, section))
exec("{}['question_number'] = '{}'".format(base, question_number))
exec("{}['sub_question_label'] = '{}'".format(base, sub_question_label))
exec("{}['sub_question_text'] = '{}'".format(base, sub_question_text))
exec("{}['display_function'] = '{}'".format(base, display_function))
exec("{}['has_other'] = '{}'".format(base, has_other))
exec("{}['has_explain'] = '{}'".format(base, has_explain))
exec("{}['has_text_year'] = '{}'".format(base, has_text_year))
exec("{}['randomize_response'] = '{}'".format(base, randomize_response))
exec("{}['response_table'] = '{}'".format(base, resp_table))
# here is where I try to add the dynamically created dict to a larger dict.
dict_of_dicts[str(base)] = exec("{}".format(base))

OK, don't do this. Ever.
Don't use exec outside of really special cases. But to answer the question, even if I don't thing you should use it: The problem you are having is that exec does not return anything. It just executes the code, it does not evaluate it. For that, there is the function eval. Replace exec in the last line with eval.
I however fully agree with #RafaelC. This is the XYProblem

Python - Pass variable handle to evaluate

I am writing some program using python and the z3py module.
What I am trying to do is the following: I extract a constraint of an if or a while statement from a function which is located in some other file. Additionally I extract the used variables in the statement as well as their types.
As I do not want to parse the constraint by hand into a z3py friendly form, I tried to use evaluate to do this for me. Therefore I used the tip of the following page: Z3 with string expressions
Now the problem is: I do not know how the variables in the constraint are called. But it seems as I have to name the handle of each variable like the actual variable. Otherwise evaluate won't find it. My code looks like this:
solver = Solver()
# Look up the constraint:
branch = bd.getBranchNum(0)
constr = branch.code
# Create handle for each variable, depending on its type:
for k in mapper.getVariables():
var = mapper.getVariables()[k]
if k in constr:
if var.type == "intNum":
Int(k)
else:
Real(k)
# Evaluate constraint, insert the result and solve it:
f = eval(constr)
solver.insert(f)
solve(f)
As you can see I saved the variables and constraints in classes. When executing this code I get the following error:
NameError: name 'real_x' is not defined
If I do not use the looping over the variables, but instead the following code, everything works fine:
solver = Solver()
branch = bd.getBranchNum(0)
constr = branch.code
print(constr)
real_x = Real('real_x')
int_y = Int('int_y')
f = eval(constr)
print(f)
solver.insert(f)
solve(f)
The problem is: I do not know, that the variables are called "real_x" or "int_y". Furthermore I do not know how many variables there are used, which means I have to use some dynamic thing like a loop.
Now my question is: Is there a way around this? What can I do to tell python that the handles already exist, but have a different name? Or is my approach completely wrong and I have to do something totally different?

This kind of thing is almost always a bad idea (see Why eval/exec is bad for more details), but "almost always" isn't "always", and it looks like you're using a library that was specifically designed to be used this way, in which case you've found one of the exceptions.
And at first glance, it seems like you've also hit one of the rare exceptions to the Keep data out of your variable names guideline (also see Why you don't want to dynamically create variables). But you haven't.
The only reason you need these variables like real_x to exist is so that eval can see them, right? But the eval function already knows how to look for variables in a dictionary instead of in your global namespace. And it looks like what you're getting back from mapper.getVariables() is a dictionary.
So, skip that whole messy loop, and just do this:
variables = mapper.getVariables()
f = eval(constr, globals=variables)
(In earlier versions of Python, globals is a positional-only argument, so just drop the globals= if you get an error about that.)
As the documentation explains, this gives the eval function access to your actual variables, plus the ones the mapper wants to generate, and it can do all kinds of unsafe things. If you want to prevent unsafe things, do this:
variables = dict(mapper.getVariables())
variables['__builtins__'] = {}
f = eval(constr, globals=variables)

empty function object in python

I've heard that python functions are objects, similar to lists or dictionaries, etc. However, what would be a similar way of performing this type of action with a function?
# Assigning empty list to 'a'
a = list()
# Assigning empty function to 'a'
a = lambda: pass
# ???
How would you do this? Further, is it necessary or proper?
Here is the sense in which I would like to use it for better context:
I have a QListWidget for selecting items which are associated with keys in a dictionary. The values in this dictionary are also dictionaries, which hold certain properties of the items, which I can add. These certain properties are stored as keys, and the values in them are initialized or updated by calling different functions. So, I'm storing a variable in the window which gets updated when a button is pressed to tell this script which property to update.
As you can see, I would like to store the function to map to the data using the correct function based on the situation.
# Get selection from the list
name = selected_item
# Initialize an empty function
f = lambda: pass
# Use property that is being added now, which was updated by the specific button that was pushed
property_list = items[name][self.property_currently_being_added]
if self.property_currently_being_added == "prop1":
f = make_property1()
elif self.property_currently_being_added == "prop2":
f = make_property2()
elif self.property_currently_being_added == "prop3":
f = make_property3()
elif self.property_currently_being_added == "prop4":
f = make_property4()
# map the certain function to the data which was retrieved earlier
added_property = map(f, data)
property_list.append(added_property)

First, the reason this doesn't work:
a = lamdba: pass
… is that lambda only allows an expression, and defines a function that returns the value of the expression. Since pass is a statement, not an expression, this is illegal.
However, this works just fine:
a = lambda: None
In Python, a function that falls off the end without a return statement always returns None. So, these are equivalent:
def a(): return None
def a(): pass
However, I don't see why you want to write this as a lambda and an assignment anyway; the def is shorter, and more readable, and gives you an introspectable function object with a nice name (a instead of <lambda>), and so on. The only reasons to ever use lambda are when you don't want to give the function a name, or when you need to define the function inside an expression. Obviously neither of those are true, because you use the lambda directly inside an assignment statement. So, just use def.
Meanwhile, this is in a sense an "empty function", or at least as empty as possible (as you can see by, e.g., calling dis.dis(a), it still takes two bytecodes to do nothing but fall off the end and return None), but it's not useful for your case. You don't want an "empty function". If you try passing your a to map, you're just going to get a TypeError, because you're trying to call a function of no arguments with one argument. (Because that's what map does.)
What you might want is an identity function, which just returns its argument as-is. Like this:
def a(x): return x
But I'm not sure that's what you want. Did you want to append data as-is in that case? Or did you want to do something different, like return early, or raise an exception, or not append anything, or …?
Finally, I don't see why you want a function at all. Why not just not call map if you have nothing to map? You have a perfectly good else clause that already catches that case (especially handy if what you want to do is return early or raise…). Or, if you prefer, you can start with f = None, and then use an if f: do decide whether to map or not. Or, if you really want:
added_property = [f(element) if f else element for element in data]
… or …
added_property = map(f, data) if f else data
As one last note, instead of a long if/elif chain that repeats the same thing over and over again, you might want a dict:
propfuncs = {'prop1': make_property1(),
'prop2': make_property2(),
'prop3': make_property3(),
'prop4': make_property4()}
Then, all that cruft turns into these two lines:
f = propfuncs.get(self.property_currently_being_added)
added_property = map(f, data) if f else data
Or course an even better design might be to replace all those make_propertyN functions with a single function that you call as make_property(1) or make_property('prop1')… but without seeing what they actually do, I can't be sure of that.

For completeness and since the title is "empty function object in python", more general case is an empty function object that takes any number of parameters, so you can use it in any callback. It's this one:
callback = lambda *_, **__: None
Explanation is here: http://echochamber.me/viewtopic.php?t=64825

I am surprised to learn that you can even do...
def a(): "This is a test"
a()

this feels so much like you're looking for a Nothing functor, I am guessing that if you had knowledge of Monads you wouldn't even need an empty function , as inspiration PyMonad has a nice Nothing implementation, I usually like to create my own, but it's a good starting point.

Scope, using functions in current module

I know this must be a trivial question, but I've tried many different ways, and searched quie a bit for a solution, but how do I create and reference subfunctions in the current module?
For example, I am writing a program to parse through a text file, and for each of the 300 different names in it, I want to assign to a category.
There are 300 of these, and I have a list of these structured to create a dict, so of the form lookup[key]=value (bonus question; any more efficient or sensible way to do this than a massive dict?).
I would like to keep all of this in the same module, but with the functions (dict initialisation, etc) at the
end of the file, so I dont have to scroll down 300 lines to see the code, i.e. as laid out as in the example below.
When I run it as below, I get the error 'initlookups is not defined'. When I structure is so that it is initialisation, then function definition, then function use, no problem.
I'm sure there must be an obvious way to initialise the functions and associated dict without keeping the code inline, but have tried quite a few so far without success. I can put it in an external module and import this, but would prefer not to for simplicity.
What should I be doing in terms of module structure? Is there any better way than using a dict to store this lookup table (It is 300 unique text keys mapping on to approx 10 categories?
Thanks,
Brendan
import ..... (initialisation code,etc )
initLookups() # **Should create the dict - How should this be referenced?**
print getlookup(KEY) # **How should this be referenced?**
def initLookups():
global lookup
lookup={}
lookup["A"]="AA"
lookup["B"]="BB"
(etc etc etc....)
def getlookup(value)
if name in lookup.keys():
getlookup=lookup[name]
else:
getlookup=""
return getlookup

A function needs to be defined before it can be called. If you want to have the code that needs to be executed at the top of the file, just define a main function and call it from the bottom:
import sys
def main(args):
pass
# All your other function definitions here
if __name__ == '__main__':
exit(main(sys.argv[1:]))
This way, whatever you reference in main will have been parsed and is hence known already. The reason for testing __name__ is that in this way the main method will only be run when the script is executed directly, not when it is imported by another file.
Side note: a dict with 300 keys is by no means massive, but you may want to either move the code that fills the dict to a separate module, or (perhaps more fancy) store the key/value pairs in a format like JSON and load it when the program starts.

Here's a more pythonic ways to do this. There aren't a lot of choices, BTW.
A function must be defined before it can be used. Period.
However, you don't have to strictly order all functions for the compiler's benefit. You merely have to put your execution of the functions last.
import # (initialisation code,etc )
def initLookups(): # Definitions must come before actual use
lookup={}
lookup["A"]="AA"
lookup["B"]="BB"
(etc etc etc....)
return lookup
# Any functions initLookups uses, can be define here.
# As long as they're findable in the same module.
if __name__ == "__main__": # Use comes last
lookup= initLookups()
print lookup.get("Key","")
Note that you don't need the getlookup function, it's a built-in feature of a dict, named get.
Also, "initialisation code" is suspicious. An import should not "do" anything. It should define functions and classes, but not actually provide any executable code. In the long run, executable code that is processed by an import can become a maintenance nightmare.
The most notable exception is a module-level Singleton object that gets created by default. Even then, be sure that the mystery object which makes a module work is clearly identified in the documentation.

If your lookup dict is unchanging, the simplest way is to just make it a module scope variable. ie:
lookup = {
'A' : 'AA',
'B' : 'BB',
...
}
If you may need to make changes, and later re-initialise it, you can do this in an initialisation function:
def initLookups():
global lookup
lookup = {
'A' : 'AA',
'B' : 'BB',
...
}
(Alternatively, lookup.update({'A':'AA', ...}) to change the dict in-place, affecting all callers with access to the old binding.)
However, if you've got these lookups in some standard format, it may be simpler simply to load it from a file and create the dictionary from that.
You can arrange your functions as you wish. The only rule about ordering is that the accessed variables must exist at the time the function is called - it's fine if the function has references to variables in the body that don't exist yet, so long as nothing actually tries to use that function. ie:
def foo():
print greeting, "World" # Note that greeting is not yet defined when foo() is created
greeting = "Hello"
foo() # Prints "Hello World"
But:
def foo():
print greeting, "World"
foo() # Gives an error - greeting not yet defined.
greeting = "Hello"
One further thing to note: your getlookup function is very inefficient. Using "if name in lookup.keys()" is actually getting a list of the keys from the dict, and then iterating over this list to find the item. This loses all the performance benefit the dict gives. Instead, "if name in lookup" would avoid this, or even better, use the fact that .get can be given a default to return if the key is not in the dictionary:
def getlookup(name)
return lookup.get(name, "")

I think that keeping the names in a flat text file, and loading them at runtime would be a good alternative. I try to stick to the lowest level of complexity possible with my data, starting with plain text and working up to a RDMS (I lifted this idea from The Pragmatic Programmer).
Dictionaries are very efficient in python. It's essentially what the whole language is built on. 300 items is well within the bounds of sane dict usage.
names.txt:
A = AAA
B = BBB
C = CCC
getname.py:
import sys
FILENAME = "names.txt"
def main(key):
pairs = (line.split("=") for line in open(FILENAME))
names = dict((x.strip(), y.strip()) for x,y in pairs)
return names.get(key, "Not found")
if __name__ == "__main__":
print main(sys.argv[-1])
If you really want to keep it all in one module for some reason, you could just stick a string at the top of the module. I think that a big swath of text is less distracting than a huge mess of dict initialization code (and easier to edit later):
import sys
LINES = """
A = AAA
B = BBB
C = CCC
D = DDD
E = EEE""".strip().splitlines()
PAIRS = (line.split("=") for line in LINES)
NAMES = dict((x.strip(), y.strip()) for x,y in PAIRS)
def main(key):
return NAMES.get(key, "Not found")
if __name__ == "__main__":
print main(sys.argv[-1])