Path: csiph.com!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder3.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder2.hal-mli.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.003 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'attribute': 0.05; 'class,': 0.07; 'differently': 0.07; 'python': 0.09; 'behave': 0.09; 'name):': 0.09; 'to:addr:comp.lang.python': 0.09; 'cc:addr :python-list': 0.10; 'looked': 0.10; 'def': 0.10; '(like': 0.15; 'lambda': 0.16; 'nonzero': 0.16; 'object):': 0.16; 'other:': 0.16; 'traceback.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.17; 'instance': 0.17; 'instance,': 0.17; "shouldn't": 0.17; 'thanks,': 0.18; '>>>': 0.18; 'define': 0.20; 'question.': 0.20; 'skip:" 40': 0.20; 'sort': 0.21; 'bit': 0.21; 'cc:2**0': 0.23; 'academic': 0.23; 'monday,': 0.23; 'raise': 0.24; 'cc:no real name:2**0': 0.24; 'pass': 0.25; 'cc:addr:python.org': 0.25; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.25; 'header :User-Agent:1': 0.26; '(most': 0.27; 'realize': 0.27; 'opposed': 0.27; 'sensible': 0.29; 'steven': 0.29; 'skip:_ 10': 0.29; 'class': 0.29; "i'm": 0.29; 'classes': 0.30; 'file': 0.32; 'print': 0.32; 'getting': 0.33; 'defining': 0.33; 'traceback': 0.33; 'another': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.34; 'wrong': 0.34; 'false': 0.35; 'received:209.85': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'does': 0.37; 'why': 0.37; 'received:209': 0.37; 'subject:: ': 0.38; 'mean': 0.38; 'gives': 0.39; 'instead': 0.39; 'received:209.85.214': 0.39; 'skip:u 10': 0.60; 'situation': 0.62; 'between': 0.63; 'skip:n 10': 0.63; 'more': 0.63; 'want,': 0.65; 'person.': 0.69; 'special': 0.73; '2013': 0.84; 'case?': 0.84; 'classic:': 0.84; 'otten': 0.84; 'received:209.85.214.184': 0.84; 'received:mail-ob0-f184.google.com': 0.84; 'x):': 0.84 X-Received: by 10.49.24.13 with SMTP id q13mr1865770qef.33.1359998947208; Mon, 04 Feb 2013 09:29:07 -0800 (PST) Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:29:07 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=75.81.116.125; posting-account=En0C2QoAAABaZIRqpPv0m3w3Duh5br5m References: <095a0432-f8a4-40b4-96ed-1588896fba66@googlegroups.com> <510f3a91$0$29866$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <863c89b0-2125-4525-8ad8-1111b0a6beae@googlegroups.com> User-Agent: G2/1.0 X-Google-Web-Client: true X-Google-IP: 75.81.116.125 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: __getattr__ Confusion From: Saul Spatz To: comp.lang.python@googlegroups.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: python-list@python.org X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Message-ID: Lines: 125 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1359998954 news.xs4all.nl 6933 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:45975 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:38133 Thanks, Peter. I realize this is getting sort of academic now, as I know how to do exactly what I want, but I'm still confused. Is __getattr__ a special case then, even for classic classes? class Adder(): # python 2.7, classic class def __init__(self, x): self.x = x self.__add__= lambda other: Adder(self.x+other.x) self.__getattr__ = lambda name: self.test(name) def __str__(self): return str(self.x) def test(self, name): print("Hello from test") raise AttributeError x = Adder(3) y = Adder(4) print(x+y) x.junk() 7 Traceback (most recent call last): File "C:\Users\Saul\Documents\PythonProjects\test.py", line 18 AttributeError: Adder instance has no attribute 'junk' Why does this work for __add__ and not for __getattr__? Of course, they both work if I write instead def __add__self, other): return Adder(self.x+other.x) def __getattr__(self, name): print(name) raise AttributeError like a sensible person. Saul On Monday, February 4, 2013 8:15:47 AM UTC-6, Peter Otten wrote: > Saul Spatz wrote: > > > > > Now I have another question. If dunder methods are looked up only in the > > > class, not the instance, why did defining __nonzero__ the way I did work? > > > Shouldn't I have had to define it with a def? Is __nonzero__ a special > > > case? > > > > Unfortunately the situation is a bit more complex. Classic classes (like > > Tkinter.Frame) behave differently from newstyle classes (subclasses of > > object): > > > > >>> def nz(): > > ... print "nonzero" > > ... return 0 > > ... > > >>> class Classic: pass > > ... > > >>> c = Classic() > > >>> c.__nonzero__ = nz > > >>> not c > > nonzero > > True > > >>> class New(object): pass > > ... > > >>> n = New() > > >>> n.__nonzero__ = nz > > >>> not n > > False > > > > So Steven is wrong here. > > > > > Shouldn't I have had to define it with a def? > > > > If you mean as opposed to a lambda, there is no difference between > > > > f = lambda ... > > > > and > > > > def f(...): ... > > > > other than that the last one gives you a nice name in a traceback.