Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #8052 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Spencer Pearson <speeze.pearson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-06-20 18:42 -0700 |
| Last post | 2011-06-20 22:12 -0700 |
| Articles | 3 — 3 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Instances' __setitem__ methods Spencer Pearson <speeze.pearson@gmail.com> - 2011-06-20 18:42 -0700
Re: Instances' __setitem__ methods Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2011-06-20 20:37 -0700
Re: Instances' __setitem__ methods Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2011-06-20 22:12 -0700
| From | Spencer Pearson <speeze.pearson@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-20 18:42 -0700 |
| Subject | Instances' __setitem__ methods |
| Message-ID | <13ffef25-879f-4d8f-8995-b4c358336c3d@o10g2000prn.googlegroups.com> |
I was recently trying to implement a dict-like object which would do
some fancy stuff when it was modified, and found that overriding the
__setitem__ method of an instance did not act the way I expected. The
help documentation (from help(dict.__setitem__)) claims that
"d.__setitem__(k,v)" is equivalent to "d[k]=v", but I've produced this
code that, on Python 2.6, acts differently in the two cases.
def print_args( key, value ):
print "print_args called: key = %s, value = %s" %(key,value)
class MyDict( dict ):
def __init__( self ):
dict.__init__( self )
self.__setitem__ = print_args
def __setitem__( self, key, value ):
print "ModelDict.__setitem__ called"
dict.__setitem__( self, key, value )
d = MyDict()
print "d.__setitem__(0,1):",
d.__setitem__(0,1)
print "d[0]=1:",
d[0]=1
I would expect the two setitems to both call print_args, but that's
not what happens. In the first case, it calls print_args, but in the
second case, the __setitem__ declared in MyDict is called instead.
The documentation at http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html#specialnames
says that for new-style classes, "x[i]" is equivalent to
"type(x).__getitem__(x, i)". I assume that "x[i]=y" has similarly been
changed to be equivalent to "type(x).__setitem__(x, i, y)", since that
would produce the results that I'm getting. Is the help documentation
for dict.__setitem__ just outdated, or am I missing some subtlety
here?
Also: when I say "d.f(*args)", am I correct in thinking that d checks
to see if it has an instance attribute called "f", and if it does,
calls f(*args); and if it doesn't, checks whether its parent class
(and then its grandparent, and so on) has a class attribute called
"f", and if it does, calls f(x, *args)?
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-20 20:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.214.1308627516.1164.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #8052 |
Spencer Pearson wrote: > I was recently trying to implement a dict-like object which would do > some fancy stuff when it was modified, and found that overriding the > __setitem__ method of an instance did not act the way I expected. The __magic__ methods are only looked up on the class, never the instance. ~Ethan~
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-20 22:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.215.1308633180.1164.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #8052 |
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Spencer Pearson <speeze.pearson@gmail.com> wrote: > I was recently trying to implement a dict-like object which would do > some fancy stuff when it was modified, and found that overriding the > __setitem__ method of an instance did not act the way I expected. The > help documentation (from help(dict.__setitem__)) claims that > "d.__setitem__(k,v)" is equivalent to "d[k]=v", but I've produced this > code that, on Python 2.6, acts differently in the two cases. Technically, the strict equivalence is only one-way, as you've shown; but one generally avoids calling the __magic__ methods directly, so this subtle distinction is seldom used intentionally. <snip> > I would expect the two setitems to both call print_args, but that's > not what happens. In the first case, it calls print_args, but in the > second case, the __setitem__ declared in MyDict is called instead. > > The documentation at http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html#specialnames > says that for new-style classes, "x[i]" is equivalent to > "type(x).__getitem__(x, i)". I assume that "x[i]=y" has similarly been > changed to be equivalent to "type(x).__setitem__(x, i, y)", since that > would produce the results that I'm getting. Is the help documentation > for dict.__setitem__ just outdated, or am I missing some subtlety > here? The sentence of the docs in question begins with "For instance,"; hence, __setitem__ is just the arbitrarily-chosen example used in this part of the docs. But the point applies equally to all the special methods. See the very last section of the same webpage: http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html#special-method-lookup-for-new-style-classes > Also: when I say "d.f(*args)", am I correct in thinking that d checks > to see if it has an instance attribute called "f", and if it does, > calls f(*args); and if it doesn't, checks whether its parent class > (and then its grandparent, and so on) has a class attribute called > "f", and if it does, calls f(x, *args)? See the first paragraph under the "Classes" entry on http://docs.python.org/reference/datamodel.html#objects-values-and-types for perfect accuracy. Cheers, Chris
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web