Python, Evaluate a Variable value as a Variable - python

I'd like to do something like below: particularly the 'f.eval(field)' part, such that it evaluates the value of the variable as the field name. How does one accomplish this in Python?
def punctuated_object_list(objects, field):
field_list = [f.eval(field) for f in objects]
if len(field_list) > 0:
if len(field_list) == 1:
return field_list[0]
else:
return ', '.join(field_list[:-1]) + ' & ' + field_list[-1]
else:
return u''

getattr(f, field), if I understand you correctly (that is, if you might have field = "foo", and want f.foo). If not, you might want to clarify. Python has an eval(), and I don't know what other languages' eval() you want the equivalent of.

getattr( object, 'field' ) #note that field is a string
f = 'field_name'
#...
getattr( object, f )
#to get a list of fields in an object, you can use dir()
dir( object )
For more details, see: http://www.diveintopython.org/power_of_introspection/index.html
Don't use eval, even if the strings are safe in this particular case! Just don't get yourself used to it. If you're getting the string from the user it could be malicious code.
Murphy's law: if things can go wrong, they will.

The python equivalent of eval() is eval()
x = 9
eval("x*2")
will give you 18.
v = "x"
eval(v+"*2")
works too.

To get at a list of all the fields in a Python object you can access its __dict__ property.
class Testing():
def __init__(self):
self.name = "Joe"
self.age = 30
test = Testing()
print test.__dict__
results:
{'age': 30, 'name': 'Joe'}

Related

Python-based method for finding an object by name

I'd like some advice on how to better extract objects from the 'self' construct by name such that the object is returned for the string of its type is provided.
My working code is presented below.
def makeObjectTypeList(self):
objectList = []
allObjects = dir( self )
for att in allObjects:
test = getattr(self, att)
test1 = test.__class__.__name__
test2 = len( re.split( self.objectType, test1) )
if test2 > 1:
objectList.append( att)
self.objectList = objectList
The value for self.objectType is the string 'QDial'. And, I return all instances of objects of QDial from the method with the re.split() method and the check on the number of items in its result (e.g., len(re.split()) > 1).
My question is how to make this more compact using 'enumerate', etc. in the mode of Python coding. My code is general so that I can pass it 'QLablel', 'QTabWidget', etc. in self.objectType, and obtain all such type-matched instances. But, it feels clunky, and I don't bother yet to trap for the case of a non-existent class type.
You can use a list comprehension that iterates through the attribute-value pairs of the dict returned by the vars function and retain only those whose class of the value matches self.objectType:
def makeObjectTypeList(self):
self.objectList = [k for k, v in vars(self).items() if v.__class__.__name__ == self.objectType]

Check if object attribute name appears in a string python

I want to:
check whether a string contains an object property
if it does then access the attribute
So for an object of class
class Person(object):
name = ""
age = 0
major = ""
def __init__(self, name="", surname="", father="", age =0):
self.name = name
self.surname = surname
self.father = father
self.age = age
self.identity = name +" "+ surname
def __str__(self):
return self.identity
__repr__ = __str__
and object
person = Person("Earl", "Martin", "Jason", 40)
I would like for string "What is the name"
to return person.name
(I already know which object the string is about)
The most basic solution would be to do cases for each property being there but the actual code has quite a few and I am sure I don't manually have to write them out, I am just new to programming so I am not sure what syntax is used for this
Any help appreciated
You are looking for the function hasattr() and getattr().
To check whether the attribute exists:
hasattr(Person(), 'string')
And to call the attribute:
getattr(Person(), 'string')
As others have noted, getattr is generally useful.
hasattr is of lesser utility; internally, it's basically a getattr call in a try/except AttributeError: block (if AttributeError occurs, it returns False, no exception means True), so if you're considering code like:
if hasattr(myobj, attrname):
attr = getattr(myobj, attrname)
...
just use:
try:
attr = getattr(myobj, attrname)
except AttributeError:
pass
else:
...
to avoid doubling the number of LEGB lookups, function calls and attribute lookups.
Alternatively, for repeatedly pulling named attribute(s), operator.attrgetter basically lets you make an optimized version of getattr that pre-binds the attribute name to lookup (making it ideal for use with stuff like the map and filter functions, as it makes them more efficient than their equivalent listcomps/genexprs).
On top of those, depending on what your goal is, the dir and (slightly less reliably, due to issues with classes that use __slots__ to define a known set of variables to reduce memory usage and prevent auto-vivification) vars functions may be useful.
For example, in your example case of pulling any attributes corresponding to a word from a string, you could do a bulk identification of legal attribute names using vars()/dir() and your choice of filter or set operations (or a mix) depending on the importance of order, uniqueness, etc.:
from future_builtins import filter # Only on Py2, not Py3
import operator
import re
def query_obj(obj, querystr):
# Extract list of legal attribute names from string
words = re.findall(r'\w+', querystr)
# Reduce to names present on object's __dict__; no need to construct temporaries
attrnames = filter(vars(obj).__contains__, words)
# Alternate if __slots__ might be an issue (temp list & frozenset):
attrnames = filter(frozenset(dir(obj)).__contains__, words)
# Or combine the two to be sure (on Py3, use .keys() instead of .viewkeys())
# (temp list and set):
attrnames = filter((vars(obj).viewkeys() | dir(obj)).__contains__, words)
# Convenient way to get all names discovered at once; returns single object
# for single attr, tuple of objects for multiple attrs:
return operator.attrgetter(*attrnames)(obj)
# If you want a tuple unconditionally, use this instead:
return tuple(getattr(obj, name) for name in attrnames)
# Or to only return the first attribute encountered, raising StopIteration
# if no attributes are found:
return next(getattr(obj, name) for name in attrnames)
Then usage is:
>>> person = Person("Earl", "Martin", "Jason", 40)
>>> query_obj(person, "What is the name?")
'Earl' # Would be ('Earl',) in unconditional tuple case
>>> query_obj(person, "What is the name and surname?")
('Earl', 'Martin') # Would be 'Earl' in single return case

What do I do when I need a self referential dictionary?

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

Are object literals Pythonic?

JavaScript has object literals, e.g.
var p = {
name: "John Smith",
age: 23
}
and .NET has anonymous types, e.g.
var p = new { Name = "John Smith", Age = 23}; // C#
Something similar can be emulated in Python by (ab)using named arguments:
class literal(object):
def __init__(self, **kwargs):
for (k,v) in kwargs.iteritems():
self.__setattr__(k, v)
def __repr__(self):
return 'literal(%s)' % ', '.join('%s = %r' % i for i in sorted(self.__dict__.iteritems()))
def __str__(self):
return repr(self)
Usage:
p = literal(name = "John Smith", age = 23)
print p # prints: literal(age = 23, name = 'John Smith')
print p.name # prints: John Smith
But is this kind of code considered to be Pythonic?
Why not just use a dictionary?
p = {'name': 'John Smith', 'age': 23}
print p
print p['name']
print p['age']
Have you considered using a named tuple?
Using your dict notation
>>> from collections import namedtuple
>>> L = namedtuple('literal', 'name age')(**{'name': 'John Smith', 'age': 23})
or keyword arguments
>>> L = namedtuple('literal', 'name age')(name='John Smith', age=23)
>>> L
literal(name='John Smith', age=23)
>>> L.name
'John Smith'
>>> L.age
23
It is possible to wrap this behaviour into a function easily enough
def literal(**kw):
return namedtuple('literal', kw)(**kw)
the lambda equivalent would be
literal = lambda **kw: namedtuple('literal', kw)(**kw)
but personally I think it's silly giving names to "anonymous" functions
From ActiveState:
class Bunch:
def __init__(self, **kwds):
self.__dict__.update(kwds)
# that's it! Now, you can create a Bunch
# whenever you want to group a few variables:
point = Bunch(datum=y, squared=y*y, coord=x)
# and of course you can read/write the named
# attributes you just created, add others, del
# some of them, etc, etc:
if point.squared > threshold:
point.isok = 1
I don't see anything wrong with creating "anonymous" classes/instances. It's often very convienient to create one with simple function call in one line of code. I personally use something like this:
def make_class( *args, **attributes ):
"""With fixed inability of using 'name' and 'bases' attributes ;)"""
if len(args) == 2:
name, bases = args
elif len(args) == 1:
name, bases = args[0], (object, )
elif not args:
name, bases = "AnonymousClass", (object, )
return type( name, bases, attributes )
obj = make_class( something = "some value" )()
print obj.something
For creating dummy objects it works just fine. Namedtuple is ok, but is immutable, which can be inconvenient at times. And dictionary is... well, a dictionary, but there are situations when you have to pass something with __getattr__ defined, instead of __getitem__.
I don't know whether it's pythonic or not, but it sometimes speeds things up and for me it's good enough reason to use it (sometimes).
I'd say that the solution you implemented looks pretty Pythonic; that being said, types.SimpleNamespace (documented here) already wraps this functionality:
from types import SimpleNamespace
p = SimpleNamespace(name = "John Smith", age = 23)
print(p)
From the Python IAQ:
As of Python 2.3 you can use the syntax
dict(a=1, b=2, c=3, dee=4)
which is good enough as far as I'm concerned. Before Python 2.3 I used the one-line function
def Dict(**dict): return dict
I think object literals make sense in JavaScript for two reasons:
In JavaScript, objects are only way to create a “thing” with string-index properties. In Python, as noted in another answer, the dictionary type does that.
JavaScript‘s object system is prototype-based. There’s no such thing as a class in JavaScript (although it‘s coming in a future version) — objects have prototype objects instead of classes. Thus it’s natural to create an object “from nothing”, via a literal, because all objects only require the built-in root object as a prototype. In Python, every object has a class — you’re sort of expected to use objects for things where you’d have multiple instances, rather than just for one-offs.
Thus no, object literals aren’t Pythonic, but they are JavaScripthonic.
A simple dictionary should be enough for most cases.
If you are looking for a similar API to the one you indicated for the literal case, you can still use dictionaries and simply override the special __getattr__ function:
class CustomDict(dict):
def __getattr__(self, name):
return self[name]
p = CustomDict(user='James', location='Earth')
print p.user
print p.location
Note: Keep in mind though that contrary to namedtuples, fields are not validated and you are in charge of making sure your arguments are sane. Arguments such as p['def'] = 'something' are tolerated inside a dictionary but you will not be able to access them via p.def.

Convert Variable Name to String?

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?

Categories

Resources