mirror of
				https://github.com/python/cpython.git
				synced 2025-10-30 21:21:22 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	
		
			
	
	
		
			1753 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			63 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
		
		
			
		
	
	
			1753 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			63 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
|   | :tocdepth: 2
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | ===============
 | ||
|  | Programming FAQ
 | ||
|  | ===============
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | .. contents::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | General Questions
 | ||
|  | =================
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Is there a source code level debugger with breakpoints, single-stepping, etc.?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Yes.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The pdb module is a simple but adequate console-mode debugger for Python. It is
 | ||
|  | part of the standard Python library, and is :mod:`documented in the Library
 | ||
|  | Reference Manual <pdb>`. You can also write your own debugger by using the code
 | ||
|  | for pdb as an example.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The IDLE interactive development environment, which is part of the standard
 | ||
|  | Python distribution (normally available as Tools/scripts/idle), includes a
 | ||
|  | graphical debugger.  There is documentation for the IDLE debugger at
 | ||
|  | http://www.python.org/idle/doc/idle2.html#Debugger.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | PythonWin is a Python IDE that includes a GUI debugger based on pdb.  The
 | ||
|  | Pythonwin debugger colors breakpoints and has quite a few cool features such as
 | ||
|  | debugging non-Pythonwin programs.  Pythonwin is available as part of the `Python
 | ||
|  | for Windows Extensions <http://sourceforge.net/projects/pywin32/>`__ project and
 | ||
|  | as a part of the ActivePython distribution (see
 | ||
|  | http://www.activestate.com/Products/ActivePython/index.html).
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | `Boa Constructor <http://boa-constructor.sourceforge.net/>`_ is an IDE and GUI
 | ||
|  | builder that uses wxWidgets.  It offers visual frame creation and manipulation,
 | ||
|  | an object inspector, many views on the source like object browsers, inheritance
 | ||
|  | hierarchies, doc string generated html documentation, an advanced debugger,
 | ||
|  | integrated help, and Zope support.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | `Eric <http://www.die-offenbachs.de/eric/index.html>`_ is an IDE built on PyQt
 | ||
|  | and the Scintilla editing component.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Pydb is a version of the standard Python debugger pdb, modified for use with DDD
 | ||
|  | (Data Display Debugger), a popular graphical debugger front end.  Pydb can be
 | ||
|  | found at http://bashdb.sourceforge.net/pydb/ and DDD can be found at
 | ||
|  | http://www.gnu.org/software/ddd.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | There are a number of commercial Python IDEs that include graphical debuggers.
 | ||
|  | They include:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | * Wing IDE (http://wingware.com/)
 | ||
|  | * Komodo IDE (http://www.activestate.com/Products/Komodo)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Is there a tool to help find bugs or perform static analysis?
 | ||
|  | -------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Yes.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | PyChecker is a static analysis tool that finds bugs in Python source code and
 | ||
|  | warns about code complexity and style.  You can get PyChecker from
 | ||
|  | http://pychecker.sf.net.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | `Pylint <http://www.logilab.org/projects/pylint>`_ is another tool that checks
 | ||
|  | if a module satisfies a coding standard, and also makes it possible to write
 | ||
|  | plug-ins to add a custom feature.  In addition to the bug checking that
 | ||
|  | PyChecker performs, Pylint offers some additional features such as checking line
 | ||
|  | length, whether variable names are well-formed according to your coding
 | ||
|  | standard, whether declared interfaces are fully implemented, and more.
 | ||
|  | http://www.logilab.org/projects/pylint/documentation provides a full list of
 | ||
|  | Pylint's features.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I create a stand-alone binary from a Python script?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You don't need the ability to compile Python to C code if all you want is a
 | ||
|  | stand-alone program that users can download and run without having to install
 | ||
|  | the Python distribution first.  There are a number of tools that determine the
 | ||
|  | set of modules required by a program and bind these modules together with a
 | ||
|  | Python binary to produce a single executable.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | One is to use the freeze tool, which is included in the Python source tree as
 | ||
|  | ``Tools/freeze``. It converts Python byte code to C arrays; a C compiler you can
 | ||
|  | embed all your modules into a new program, which is then linked with the
 | ||
|  | standard Python modules.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It works by scanning your source recursively for import statements (in both
 | ||
|  | forms) and looking for the modules in the standard Python path as well as in the
 | ||
|  | source directory (for built-in modules).  It then turns the bytecode for modules
 | ||
|  | written in Python into C code (array initializers that can be turned into code
 | ||
|  | objects using the marshal module) and creates a custom-made config file that
 | ||
|  | only contains those built-in modules which are actually used in the program.  It
 | ||
|  | then compiles the generated C code and links it with the rest of the Python
 | ||
|  | interpreter to form a self-contained binary which acts exactly like your script.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Obviously, freeze requires a C compiler.  There are several other utilities
 | ||
|  | which don't. One is Thomas Heller's py2exe (Windows only) at
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     http://www.py2exe.org/
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Another is Christian Tismer's `SQFREEZE <http://starship.python.net/crew/pirx>`_
 | ||
|  | which appends the byte code to a specially-prepared Python interpreter that can
 | ||
|  | find the byte code in the executable.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Other tools include Fredrik Lundh's `Squeeze
 | ||
|  | <http://www.pythonware.com/products/python/squeeze>`_ and Anthony Tuininga's
 | ||
|  | `cx_Freeze <http://starship.python.net/crew/atuining/cx_Freeze/index.html>`_.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Are there coding standards or a style guide for Python programs?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Yes.  The coding style required for standard library modules is documented as
 | ||
|  | :pep:`8`.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | My program is too slow. How do I speed it up?
 | ||
|  | ---------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | That's a tough one, in general.  There are many tricks to speed up Python code;
 | ||
|  | consider rewriting parts in C as a last resort.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In some cases it's possible to automatically translate Python to C or x86
 | ||
|  | assembly language, meaning that you don't have to modify your code to gain
 | ||
|  | increased speed.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | .. XXX seems to have overlap with other questions!
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | `Pyrex <http://www.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz/~greg/python/Pyrex/>`_ can compile a
 | ||
|  | slightly modified version of Python code into a C extension, and can be used on
 | ||
|  | many different platforms.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | `Psyco <http://psyco.sourceforge.net>`_ is a just-in-time compiler that
 | ||
|  | translates Python code into x86 assembly language.  If you can use it, Psyco can
 | ||
|  | provide dramatic speedups for critical functions.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The rest of this answer will discuss various tricks for squeezing a bit more
 | ||
|  | speed out of Python code.  *Never* apply any optimization tricks unless you know
 | ||
|  | you need them, after profiling has indicated that a particular function is the
 | ||
|  | heavily executed hot spot in the code.  Optimizations almost always make the
 | ||
|  | code less clear, and you shouldn't pay the costs of reduced clarity (increased
 | ||
|  | development time, greater likelihood of bugs) unless the resulting performance
 | ||
|  | benefit is worth it.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | There is a page on the wiki devoted to `performance tips
 | ||
|  | <http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSpeed/PerformanceTips>`_.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Guido van Rossum has written up an anecdote related to optimization at
 | ||
|  | http://www.python.org/doc/essays/list2str.html.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | One thing to notice is that function and (especially) method calls are rather
 | ||
|  | expensive; if you have designed a purely OO interface with lots of tiny
 | ||
|  | functions that don't do much more than get or set an instance variable or call
 | ||
|  | another method, you might consider using a more direct way such as directly
 | ||
|  | accessing instance variables.  Also see the standard module :mod:`profile` which
 | ||
|  | makes it possible to find out where your program is spending most of its time
 | ||
|  | (if you have some patience -- the profiling itself can slow your program down by
 | ||
|  | an order of magnitude).
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Remember that many standard optimization heuristics you may know from other
 | ||
|  | programming experience may well apply to Python.  For example it may be faster
 | ||
|  | to send output to output devices using larger writes rather than smaller ones in
 | ||
|  | order to reduce the overhead of kernel system calls.  Thus CGI scripts that
 | ||
|  | write all output in "one shot" may be faster than those that write lots of small
 | ||
|  | pieces of output.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Also, be sure to use Python's core features where appropriate.  For example,
 | ||
|  | slicing allows programs to chop up lists and other sequence objects in a single
 | ||
|  | tick of the interpreter's mainloop using highly optimized C implementations.
 | ||
|  | Thus to get the same effect as::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    L2 = []
 | ||
|  |    for i in range[3]:
 | ||
|  |        L2.append(L1[i])
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | it is much shorter and far faster to use ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    L2 = list(L1[:3]) # "list" is redundant if L1 is a list.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Note that the functionally-oriented builtins such as :func:`map`, :func:`zip`,
 | ||
|  | and friends can be a convenient accelerator for loops that perform a single
 | ||
|  | task.  For example to pair the elements of two lists together::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> zip([1,2,3], [4,5,6])
 | ||
|  |    [(1, 4), (2, 5), (3, 6)]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | or to compute a number of sines::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> map( math.sin, (1,2,3,4))
 | ||
|  |    [0.841470984808, 0.909297426826, 0.14112000806,   -0.756802495308]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The operation completes very quickly in such cases.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Other examples include the ``join()`` and ``split()`` methods of string objects.
 | ||
|  | For example if s1..s7 are large (10K+) strings then
 | ||
|  | ``"".join([s1,s2,s3,s4,s5,s6,s7])`` may be far faster than the more obvious
 | ||
|  | ``s1+s2+s3+s4+s5+s6+s7``, since the "summation" will compute many
 | ||
|  | subexpressions, whereas ``join()`` does all the copying in one pass.  For
 | ||
|  | manipulating strings, use the ``replace()`` method on string objects. Use
 | ||
|  | regular expressions only when you're not dealing with constant string patterns.
 | ||
|  | Consider using the string formatting operations ``string % tuple`` and ``string
 | ||
|  | % dictionary``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Be sure to use the :meth:`list.sort` builtin method to do sorting, and see the
 | ||
|  | `sorting mini-HOWTO <http://wiki.python.org/moin/HowTo/Sorting>`_ for examples
 | ||
|  | of moderately advanced usage.  :meth:`list.sort` beats other techniques for
 | ||
|  | sorting in all but the most extreme circumstances.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Another common trick is to "push loops into functions or methods."  For example
 | ||
|  | suppose you have a program that runs slowly and you use the profiler to
 | ||
|  | determine that a Python function ``ff()`` is being called lots of times.  If you
 | ||
|  | notice that ``ff ()``::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def ff(x):
 | ||
|  |        ... # do something with x computing result...
 | ||
|  |        return result
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | tends to be called in loops like::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    list = map(ff, oldlist)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | or::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    for x in sequence:
 | ||
|  |        value = ff(x)
 | ||
|  |        ... # do something with value...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | then you can often eliminate function call overhead by rewriting ``ff()`` to::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def ffseq(seq):
 | ||
|  |        resultseq = []
 | ||
|  |        for x in seq:
 | ||
|  |            ... # do something with x computing result...
 | ||
|  |            resultseq.append(result)
 | ||
|  |        return resultseq
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | and rewrite the two examples to ``list = ffseq(oldlist)`` and to::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    for value in ffseq(sequence):
 | ||
|  |        ... # do something with value...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Single calls to ``ff(x)`` translate to ``ffseq([x])[0]`` with little penalty.
 | ||
|  | Of course this technique is not always appropriate and there are other variants
 | ||
|  | which you can figure out.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You can gain some performance by explicitly storing the results of a function or
 | ||
|  | method lookup into a local variable.  A loop like::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    for key in token:
 | ||
|  |        dict[key] = dict.get(key, 0) + 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | resolves ``dict.get`` every iteration.  If the method isn't going to change, a
 | ||
|  | slightly faster implementation is::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    dict_get = dict.get  # look up the method once
 | ||
|  |    for key in token:
 | ||
|  |        dict[key] = dict_get(key, 0) + 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Default arguments can be used to determine values once, at compile time instead
 | ||
|  | of at run time.  This can only be done for functions or objects which will not
 | ||
|  | be changed during program execution, such as replacing ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def degree_sin(deg):
 | ||
|  |        return math.sin(deg * math.pi / 180.0)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | with ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def degree_sin(deg, factor=math.pi/180.0, sin=math.sin):
 | ||
|  |        return sin(deg * factor)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Because this trick uses default arguments for terms which should not be changed,
 | ||
|  | it should only be used when you are not concerned with presenting a possibly
 | ||
|  | confusing API to your users.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Core Language
 | ||
|  | =============
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do you set a global variable in a function?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Did you do something like this? ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    x = 1 # make a global
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def f():
 | ||
|  |        print x # try to print the global
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        for j in range(100):
 | ||
|  |            if q > 3:
 | ||
|  |                x = 4
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Any variable assigned in a function is local to that function.  unless it is
 | ||
|  | specifically declared global.  Since a value is bound to ``x`` as the last
 | ||
|  | statement of the function body, the compiler assumes that ``x`` is
 | ||
|  | local. Consequently the ``print x`` attempts to print an uninitialized local
 | ||
|  | variable and will trigger a ``NameError``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The solution is to insert an explicit global declaration at the start of the
 | ||
|  | function::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def f():
 | ||
|  |        global x
 | ||
|  |        print x # try to print the global
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        for j in range(100):
 | ||
|  |            if q > 3:
 | ||
|  |                x = 4
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In this case, all references to ``x`` are interpreted as references to the ``x``
 | ||
|  | from the module namespace.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What are the rules for local and global variables in Python?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In Python, variables that are only referenced inside a function are implicitly
 | ||
|  | global.  If a variable is assigned a new value anywhere within the function's
 | ||
|  | body, it's assumed to be a local.  If a variable is ever assigned a new value
 | ||
|  | inside the function, the variable is implicitly local, and you need to
 | ||
|  | explicitly declare it as 'global'.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Though a bit surprising at first, a moment's consideration explains this.  On
 | ||
|  | one hand, requiring :keyword:`global` for assigned variables provides a bar
 | ||
|  | against unintended side-effects.  On the other hand, if ``global`` was required
 | ||
|  | for all global references, you'd be using ``global`` all the time.  You'd have
 | ||
|  | to declare as global every reference to a builtin function or to a component of
 | ||
|  | an imported module.  This clutter would defeat the usefulness of the ``global``
 | ||
|  | declaration for identifying side-effects.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I share global variables across modules?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The canonical way to share information across modules within a single program is
 | ||
|  | to create a special module (often called config or cfg).  Just import the config
 | ||
|  | module in all modules of your application; the module then becomes available as
 | ||
|  | a global name.  Because there is only one instance of each module, any changes
 | ||
|  | made to the module object get reflected everywhere.  For example:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | config.py::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    x = 0   # Default value of the 'x' configuration setting
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | mod.py::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    import config
 | ||
|  |    config.x = 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | main.py::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    import config
 | ||
|  |    import mod
 | ||
|  |    print config.x
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Note that using a module is also the basis for implementing the Singleton design
 | ||
|  | pattern, for the same reason.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What are the "best practices" for using import in a module?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In general, don't use ``from modulename import *``.  Doing so clutters the
 | ||
|  | importer's namespace.  Some people avoid this idiom even with the few modules
 | ||
|  | that were designed to be imported in this manner.  Modules designed in this
 | ||
|  | manner include :mod:`Tkinter`, and :mod:`threading`.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Import modules at the top of a file.  Doing so makes it clear what other modules
 | ||
|  | your code requires and avoids questions of whether the module name is in scope.
 | ||
|  | Using one import per line makes it easy to add and delete module imports, but
 | ||
|  | using multiple imports per line uses less screen space.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It's good practice if you import modules in the following order:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 1. standard library modules -- e.g. ``sys``, ``os``, ``getopt``, ``re``)
 | ||
|  | 2. third-party library modules (anything installed in Python's site-packages
 | ||
|  |    directory) -- e.g. mx.DateTime, ZODB, PIL.Image, etc.
 | ||
|  | 3. locally-developed modules
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Never use relative package imports.  If you're writing code that's in the
 | ||
|  | ``package.sub.m1`` module and want to import ``package.sub.m2``, do not just
 | ||
|  | write ``import m2``, even though it's legal.  Write ``from package.sub import
 | ||
|  | m2`` instead.  Relative imports can lead to a module being initialized twice,
 | ||
|  | leading to confusing bugs.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It is sometimes necessary to move imports to a function or class to avoid
 | ||
|  | problems with circular imports.  Gordon McMillan says:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    Circular imports are fine where both modules use the "import <module>" form
 | ||
|  |    of import.  They fail when the 2nd module wants to grab a name out of the
 | ||
|  |    first ("from module import name") and the import is at the top level.  That's
 | ||
|  |    because names in the 1st are not yet available, because the first module is
 | ||
|  |    busy importing the 2nd.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In this case, if the second module is only used in one function, then the import
 | ||
|  | can easily be moved into that function.  By the time the import is called, the
 | ||
|  | first module will have finished initializing, and the second module can do its
 | ||
|  | import.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It may also be necessary to move imports out of the top level of code if some of
 | ||
|  | the modules are platform-specific.  In that case, it may not even be possible to
 | ||
|  | import all of the modules at the top of the file.  In this case, importing the
 | ||
|  | correct modules in the corresponding platform-specific code is a good option.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Only move imports into a local scope, such as inside a function definition, if
 | ||
|  | it's necessary to solve a problem such as avoiding a circular import or are
 | ||
|  | trying to reduce the initialization time of a module.  This technique is
 | ||
|  | especially helpful if many of the imports are unnecessary depending on how the
 | ||
|  | program executes.  You may also want to move imports into a function if the
 | ||
|  | modules are only ever used in that function.  Note that loading a module the
 | ||
|  | first time may be expensive because of the one time initialization of the
 | ||
|  | module, but loading a module multiple times is virtually free, costing only a
 | ||
|  | couple of dictionary lookups.  Even if the module name has gone out of scope,
 | ||
|  | the module is probably available in :data:`sys.modules`.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If only instances of a specific class use a module, then it is reasonable to
 | ||
|  | import the module in the class's ``__init__`` method and then assign the module
 | ||
|  | to an instance variable so that the module is always available (via that
 | ||
|  | instance variable) during the life of the object.  Note that to delay an import
 | ||
|  | until the class is instantiated, the import must be inside a method.  Putting
 | ||
|  | the import inside the class but outside of any method still causes the import to
 | ||
|  | occur when the module is initialized.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I pass optional or keyword parameters from one function to another?
 | ||
|  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Collect the arguments using the ``*`` and ``**`` specifiers in the function's
 | ||
|  | parameter list; this gives you the positional arguments as a tuple and the
 | ||
|  | keyword arguments as a dictionary.  You can then pass these arguments when
 | ||
|  | calling another function by using ``*`` and ``**``::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def f(x, *args, **kwargs):
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        kwargs['width'] = '14.3c'
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        g(x, *args, **kwargs)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In the unlikely case that you care about Python versions older than 2.0, use
 | ||
|  | :func:`apply`::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def f(x, *args, **kwargs):
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        kwargs['width'] = '14.3c'
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        apply(g, (x,)+args, kwargs)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I write a function with output parameters (call by reference)?
 | ||
|  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Remember that arguments are passed by assignment in Python.  Since assignment
 | ||
|  | just creates references to objects, there's no alias between an argument name in
 | ||
|  | the caller and callee, and so no call-by-reference per se.  You can achieve the
 | ||
|  | desired effect in a number of ways.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 1) By returning a tuple of the results::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       def func2(a, b):
 | ||
|  |           a = 'new-value'        # a and b are local names
 | ||
|  |           b = b + 1              # assigned to new objects
 | ||
|  |           return a, b            # return new values
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       x, y = 'old-value', 99
 | ||
|  |       x, y = func2(x, y)
 | ||
|  |       print x, y                 # output: new-value 100
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    This is almost always the clearest solution.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 2) By using global variables.  This isn't thread-safe, and is not recommended.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 3) By passing a mutable (changeable in-place) object::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       def func1(a):
 | ||
|  |           a[0] = 'new-value'     # 'a' references a mutable list
 | ||
|  |           a[1] = a[1] + 1        # changes a shared object
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       args = ['old-value', 99]
 | ||
|  |       func1(args)
 | ||
|  |       print args[0], args[1]     # output: new-value 100
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 4) By passing in a dictionary that gets mutated::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       def func3(args):
 | ||
|  |           args['a'] = 'new-value'     # args is a mutable dictionary
 | ||
|  |           args['b'] = args['b'] + 1   # change it in-place
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       args = {'a':' old-value', 'b': 99}
 | ||
|  |       func3(args)
 | ||
|  |       print args['a'], args['b']
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 5) Or bundle up values in a class instance::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       class callByRef:
 | ||
|  |           def __init__(self, **args):
 | ||
|  |               for (key, value) in args.items():
 | ||
|  |                   setattr(self, key, value)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       def func4(args):
 | ||
|  |           args.a = 'new-value'        # args is a mutable callByRef
 | ||
|  |           args.b = args.b + 1         # change object in-place
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |       args = callByRef(a='old-value', b=99)
 | ||
|  |       func4(args)
 | ||
|  |       print args.a, args.b
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    There's almost never a good reason to get this complicated.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Your best choice is to return a tuple containing the multiple results.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do you make a higher order function in Python?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You have two choices: you can use nested scopes or you can use callable objects.
 | ||
|  | For example, suppose you wanted to define ``linear(a,b)`` which returns a
 | ||
|  | function ``f(x)`` that computes the value ``a*x+b``.  Using nested scopes::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def linear(a, b):
 | ||
|  |        def result(x):
 | ||
|  |            return a * x + b
 | ||
|  |        return result
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Or using a callable object::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class linear:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def __init__(self, a, b):
 | ||
|  |            self.a, self.b = a, b
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def __call__(self, x):
 | ||
|  |            return self.a * x + self.b
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In both cases, ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    taxes = linear(0.3, 2)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | gives a callable object where ``taxes(10e6) == 0.3 * 10e6 + 2``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The callable object approach has the disadvantage that it is a bit slower and
 | ||
|  | results in slightly longer code.  However, note that a collection of callables
 | ||
|  | can share their signature via inheritance::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class exponential(linear):
 | ||
|  |        # __init__ inherited
 | ||
|  |        def __call__(self, x):
 | ||
|  |            return self.a * (x ** self.b)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Object can encapsulate state for several methods::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class counter:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        value = 0
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def set(self, x):
 | ||
|  |            self.value = x
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def up(self):
 | ||
|  |            self.value = self.value + 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def down(self):
 | ||
|  |            self.value = self.value - 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    count = counter()
 | ||
|  |    inc, dec, reset = count.up, count.down, count.set
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Here ``inc()``, ``dec()`` and ``reset()`` act like functions which share the
 | ||
|  | same counting variable.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I copy an object in Python?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In general, try :func:`copy.copy` or :func:`copy.deepcopy` for the general case.
 | ||
|  | Not all objects can be copied, but most can.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Some objects can be copied more easily.  Dictionaries have a :meth:`~dict.copy`
 | ||
|  | method::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    newdict = olddict.copy()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Sequences can be copied by slicing::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    new_l = l[:]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I find the methods or attributes of an object?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For an instance x of a user-defined class, ``dir(x)`` returns an alphabetized
 | ||
|  | list of the names containing the instance attributes and methods and attributes
 | ||
|  | defined by its class.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can my code discover the name of an object?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Generally speaking, it can't, because objects don't really have names.
 | ||
|  | Essentially, assignment always binds a name to a value; The same is true of
 | ||
|  | ``def`` and ``class`` statements, but in that case the value is a
 | ||
|  | callable. Consider the following code::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class A:
 | ||
|  |        pass
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    B = A
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    a = B()
 | ||
|  |    b = a
 | ||
|  |    print b
 | ||
|  |    <__main__.A instance at 016D07CC>
 | ||
|  |    print a
 | ||
|  |    <__main__.A instance at 016D07CC>
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Arguably the class has a name: even though it is bound to two names and invoked
 | ||
|  | through the name B the created instance is still reported as an instance of
 | ||
|  | class A.  However, it is impossible to say whether the instance's name is a or
 | ||
|  | b, since both names are bound to the same value.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Generally speaking it should not be necessary for your code to "know the names"
 | ||
|  | of particular values. Unless you are deliberately writing introspective
 | ||
|  | programs, this is usually an indication that a change of approach might be
 | ||
|  | beneficial.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In comp.lang.python, Fredrik Lundh once gave an excellent analogy in answer to
 | ||
|  | this question:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    The same way as you get the name of that cat you found on your porch: the cat
 | ||
|  |    (object) itself cannot tell you its name, and it doesn't really care -- so
 | ||
|  |    the only way to find out what it's called is to ask all your neighbours
 | ||
|  |    (namespaces) if it's their cat (object)...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    ....and don't be surprised if you'll find that it's known by many names, or
 | ||
|  |    no name at all!
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What's up with the comma operator's precedence?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Comma is not an operator in Python.  Consider this session::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     >>> "a" in "b", "a"
 | ||
|  |     (False, '1')
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Since the comma is not an operator, but a separator between expressions the
 | ||
|  | above is evaluated as if you had entered::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     >>> ("a" in "b"), "a"
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | not::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     >>> "a" in ("5", "a")
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The same is true of the various assignment operators (``=``, ``+=`` etc).  They
 | ||
|  | are not truly operators but syntactic delimiters in assignment statements.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Is there an equivalent of C's "?:" ternary operator?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Yes, this feature was added in Python 2.5. The syntax would be as follows::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    [on_true] if [expression] else [on_false]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    x, y = 50, 25
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    small = x if x < y else y
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For versions previous to 2.5 the answer would be 'No'.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | .. XXX remove rest?
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In many cases you can mimic ``a ? b : c`` with ``a and b or c``, but there's a
 | ||
|  | flaw: if *b* is zero (or empty, or ``None`` -- anything that tests false) then
 | ||
|  | *c* will be selected instead.  In many cases you can prove by looking at the
 | ||
|  | code that this can't happen (e.g. because *b* is a constant or has a type that
 | ||
|  | can never be false), but in general this can be a problem.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Tim Peters (who wishes it was Steve Majewski) suggested the following solution:
 | ||
|  | ``(a and [b] or [c])[0]``.  Because ``[b]`` is a singleton list it is never
 | ||
|  | false, so the wrong path is never taken; then applying ``[0]`` to the whole
 | ||
|  | thing gets the *b* or *c* that you really wanted.  Ugly, but it gets you there
 | ||
|  | in the rare cases where it is really inconvenient to rewrite your code using
 | ||
|  | 'if'.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The best course is usually to write a simple ``if...else`` statement.  Another
 | ||
|  | solution is to implement the ``?:`` operator as a function::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def q(cond, on_true, on_false):
 | ||
|  |        if cond:
 | ||
|  |            if not isfunction(on_true):
 | ||
|  |                return on_true
 | ||
|  |            else:
 | ||
|  |                return apply(on_true)
 | ||
|  |        else:
 | ||
|  |            if not isfunction(on_false):
 | ||
|  |                return on_false
 | ||
|  |            else:
 | ||
|  |                return apply(on_false)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In most cases you'll pass b and c directly: ``q(a, b, c)``.  To avoid evaluating
 | ||
|  | b or c when they shouldn't be, encapsulate them within a lambda function, e.g.:
 | ||
|  | ``q(a, lambda: b, lambda: c)``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It has been asked *why* Python has no if-then-else expression.  There are
 | ||
|  | several answers: many languages do just fine without one; it can easily lead to
 | ||
|  | less readable code; no sufficiently "Pythonic" syntax has been discovered; a
 | ||
|  | search of the standard library found remarkably few places where using an
 | ||
|  | if-then-else expression would make the code more understandable.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In 2002, :pep:`308` was written proposing several possible syntaxes and the
 | ||
|  | community was asked to vote on the issue.  The vote was inconclusive.  Most
 | ||
|  | people liked one of the syntaxes, but also hated other syntaxes; many votes
 | ||
|  | implied that people preferred no ternary operator rather than having a syntax
 | ||
|  | they hated.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Is it possible to write obfuscated one-liners in Python?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Yes.  Usually this is done by nesting :keyword:`lambda` within
 | ||
|  | :keyword:`lambda`.  See the following three examples, due to Ulf Bartelt::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    # Primes < 1000
 | ||
|  |    print filter(None,map(lambda y:y*reduce(lambda x,y:x*y!=0,
 | ||
|  |    map(lambda x,y=y:y%x,range(2,int(pow(y,0.5)+1))),1),range(2,1000)))
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    # First 10 Fibonacci numbers
 | ||
|  |    print map(lambda x,f=lambda x,f:(x<=1) or (f(x-1,f)+f(x-2,f)): f(x,f),
 | ||
|  |    range(10))
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    # Mandelbrot set
 | ||
|  |    print (lambda Ru,Ro,Iu,Io,IM,Sx,Sy:reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,map(lambda y,
 | ||
|  |    Iu=Iu,Io=Io,Ru=Ru,Ro=Ro,Sy=Sy,L=lambda yc,Iu=Iu,Io=Io,Ru=Ru,Ro=Ro,i=IM,
 | ||
|  |    Sx=Sx,Sy=Sy:reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,map(lambda x,xc=Ru,yc=yc,Ru=Ru,Ro=Ro,
 | ||
|  |    i=i,Sx=Sx,F=lambda xc,yc,x,y,k,f=lambda xc,yc,x,y,k,f:(k<=0)or (x*x+y*y
 | ||
|  |    >=4.0) or 1+f(xc,yc,x*x-y*y+xc,2.0*x*y+yc,k-1,f):f(xc,yc,x,y,k,f):chr(
 | ||
|  |    64+F(Ru+x*(Ro-Ru)/Sx,yc,0,0,i)),range(Sx))):L(Iu+y*(Io-Iu)/Sy),range(Sy
 | ||
|  |    ))))(-2.1, 0.7, -1.2, 1.2, 30, 80, 24)
 | ||
|  |    #    \___ ___/  \___ ___/  |   |   |__ lines on screen
 | ||
|  |    #        V          V      |   |______ columns on screen
 | ||
|  |    #        |          |      |__________ maximum of "iterations"
 | ||
|  |    #        |          |_________________ range on y axis
 | ||
|  |    #        |____________________________ range on x axis
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Don't try this at home, kids!
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Numbers and strings
 | ||
|  | ===================
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I specify hexadecimal and octal integers?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | To specify an octal digit, precede the octal value with a zero.  For example, to
 | ||
|  | set the variable "a" to the octal value "10" (8 in decimal), type::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> a = 010
 | ||
|  |    >>> a
 | ||
|  |    8
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Hexadecimal is just as easy.  Simply precede the hexadecimal number with a zero,
 | ||
|  | and then a lower or uppercase "x".  Hexadecimal digits can be specified in lower
 | ||
|  | or uppercase.  For example, in the Python interpreter::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> a = 0xa5
 | ||
|  |    >>> a
 | ||
|  |    165
 | ||
|  |    >>> b = 0XB2
 | ||
|  |    >>> b
 | ||
|  |    178
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Why does -22 / 10 return -3?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It's primarily driven by the desire that ``i % j`` have the same sign as ``j``.
 | ||
|  | If you want that, and also want::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     i == (i / j) * j + (i % j)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | then integer division has to return the floor.  C also requires that identity to
 | ||
|  | hold, and then compilers that truncate ``i / j`` need to make ``i % j`` have the
 | ||
|  | same sign as ``i``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | There are few real use cases for ``i % j`` when ``j`` is negative.  When ``j``
 | ||
|  | is positive, there are many, and in virtually all of them it's more useful for
 | ||
|  | ``i % j`` to be ``>= 0``.  If the clock says 10 now, what did it say 200 hours
 | ||
|  | ago?  ``-190 % 12 == 2`` is useful; ``-190 % 12 == -10`` is a bug waiting to
 | ||
|  | bite.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I convert a string to a number?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For integers, use the built-in :func:`int` type constructor, e.g. ``int('144')
 | ||
|  | == 144``.  Similarly, :func:`float` converts to floating-point,
 | ||
|  | e.g. ``float('144') == 144.0``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | By default, these interpret the number as decimal, so that ``int('0144') ==
 | ||
|  | 144`` and ``int('0x144')`` raises :exc:`ValueError`. ``int(string, base)`` takes
 | ||
|  | the base to convert from as a second optional argument, so ``int('0x144', 16) ==
 | ||
|  | 324``.  If the base is specified as 0, the number is interpreted using Python's
 | ||
|  | rules: a leading '0' indicates octal, and '0x' indicates a hex number.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Do not use the built-in function :func:`eval` if all you need is to convert
 | ||
|  | strings to numbers.  :func:`eval` will be significantly slower and it presents a
 | ||
|  | security risk: someone could pass you a Python expression that might have
 | ||
|  | unwanted side effects.  For example, someone could pass
 | ||
|  | ``__import__('os').system("rm -rf $HOME")`` which would erase your home
 | ||
|  | directory.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | :func:`eval` also has the effect of interpreting numbers as Python expressions,
 | ||
|  | so that e.g. ``eval('09')`` gives a syntax error because Python regards numbers
 | ||
|  | starting with '0' as octal (base 8).
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I convert a number to a string?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | To convert, e.g., the number 144 to the string '144', use the built-in type
 | ||
|  | constructor :func:`str`.  If you want a hexadecimal or octal representation, use
 | ||
|  | the built-in functions ``hex()`` or ``oct()``.  For fancy formatting, use
 | ||
|  | :ref:`the % operator <string-formatting>` on strings, e.g. ``"%04d" % 144``
 | ||
|  | yields ``'0144'`` and ``"%.3f" % (1/3.0)`` yields ``'0.333'``.  See the library
 | ||
|  | reference manual for details.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I modify a string in place?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You can't, because strings are immutable.  If you need an object with this
 | ||
|  | ability, try converting the string to a list or use the array module::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> s = "Hello, world"
 | ||
|  |    >>> a = list(s)
 | ||
|  |    >>> print a
 | ||
|  |    ['H', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o', ',', ' ', 'w', 'o', 'r', 'l', 'd']
 | ||
|  |    >>> a[7:] = list("there!")
 | ||
|  |    >>> ''.join(a)
 | ||
|  |    'Hello, there!'
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> import array
 | ||
|  |    >>> a = array.array('c', s)
 | ||
|  |    >>> print a
 | ||
|  |    array('c', 'Hello, world')
 | ||
|  |    >>> a[0] = 'y' ; print a
 | ||
|  |    array('c', 'yello world')
 | ||
|  |    >>> a.tostring()
 | ||
|  |    'yello, world'
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I use strings to call functions/methods?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | There are various techniques.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | * The best is to use a dictionary that maps strings to functions.  The primary
 | ||
|  |   advantage of this technique is that the strings do not need to match the names
 | ||
|  |   of the functions.  This is also the primary technique used to emulate a case
 | ||
|  |   construct::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      def a():
 | ||
|  |          pass
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      def b():
 | ||
|  |          pass
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      dispatch = {'go': a, 'stop': b}  # Note lack of parens for funcs
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      dispatch[get_input()]()  # Note trailing parens to call function
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | * Use the built-in function :func:`getattr`::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      import foo
 | ||
|  |      getattr(foo, 'bar')()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |   Note that :func:`getattr` works on any object, including classes, class
 | ||
|  |   instances, modules, and so on.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |   This is used in several places in the standard library, like this::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      class Foo:
 | ||
|  |          def do_foo(self):
 | ||
|  |              ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |          def do_bar(self):
 | ||
|  |              ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      f = getattr(foo_instance, 'do_' + opname)
 | ||
|  |      f()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | * Use :func:`locals` or :func:`eval` to resolve the function name::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      def myFunc():
 | ||
|  |          print "hello"
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      fname = "myFunc"
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      f = locals()[fname]
 | ||
|  |      f()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      f = eval(fname)
 | ||
|  |      f()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |   Note: Using :func:`eval` is slow and dangerous.  If you don't have absolute
 | ||
|  |   control over the contents of the string, someone could pass a string that
 | ||
|  |   resulted in an arbitrary function being executed.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Is there an equivalent to Perl's chomp() for removing trailing newlines from strings?
 | ||
|  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Starting with Python 2.2, you can use ``S.rstrip("\r\n")`` to remove all
 | ||
|  | occurences of any line terminator from the end of the string ``S`` without
 | ||
|  | removing other trailing whitespace.  If the string ``S`` represents more than
 | ||
|  | one line, with several empty lines at the end, the line terminators for all the
 | ||
|  | blank lines will be removed::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> lines = ("line 1 \r\n"
 | ||
|  |    ...          "\r\n"
 | ||
|  |    ...          "\r\n")
 | ||
|  |    >>> lines.rstrip("\n\r")
 | ||
|  |    "line 1 "
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Since this is typically only desired when reading text one line at a time, using
 | ||
|  | ``S.rstrip()`` this way works well.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For older versions of Python, There are two partial substitutes:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | - If you want to remove all trailing whitespace, use the ``rstrip()`` method of
 | ||
|  |   string objects.  This removes all trailing whitespace, not just a single
 | ||
|  |   newline.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | - Otherwise, if there is only one line in the string ``S``, use
 | ||
|  |   ``S.splitlines()[0]``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Is there a scanf() or sscanf() equivalent?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Not as such.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For simple input parsing, the easiest approach is usually to split the line into
 | ||
|  | whitespace-delimited words using the :meth:`~str.split` method of string objects
 | ||
|  | and then convert decimal strings to numeric values using :func:`int` or
 | ||
|  | :func:`float`.  ``split()`` supports an optional "sep" parameter which is useful
 | ||
|  | if the line uses something other than whitespace as a separator.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For more complicated input parsing, regular expressions more powerful than C's
 | ||
|  | :cfunc:`sscanf` and better suited for the task.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What does 'UnicodeError: ASCII [decoding,encoding] error: ordinal not in range(128)' mean?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This error indicates that your Python installation can handle only 7-bit ASCII
 | ||
|  | strings.  There are a couple ways to fix or work around the problem.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If your programs must handle data in arbitrary character set encodings, the
 | ||
|  | environment the application runs in will generally identify the encoding of the
 | ||
|  | data it is handing you.  You need to convert the input to Unicode data using
 | ||
|  | that encoding.  For example, a program that handles email or web input will
 | ||
|  | typically find character set encoding information in Content-Type headers.  This
 | ||
|  | can then be used to properly convert input data to Unicode. Assuming the string
 | ||
|  | referred to by ``value`` is encoded as UTF-8::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    value = unicode(value, "utf-8")
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | will return a Unicode object.  If the data is not correctly encoded as UTF-8,
 | ||
|  | the above call will raise a :exc:`UnicodeError` exception.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If you only want strings converted to Unicode which have non-ASCII data, you can
 | ||
|  | try converting them first assuming an ASCII encoding, and then generate Unicode
 | ||
|  | objects if that fails::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    try:
 | ||
|  |        x = unicode(value, "ascii")
 | ||
|  |    except UnicodeError:
 | ||
|  |        value = unicode(value, "utf-8")
 | ||
|  |    else:
 | ||
|  |        # value was valid ASCII data
 | ||
|  |        pass
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | It's possible to set a default encoding in a file called ``sitecustomize.py``
 | ||
|  | that's part of the Python library.  However, this isn't recommended because
 | ||
|  | changing the Python-wide default encoding may cause third-party extension
 | ||
|  | modules to fail.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Note that on Windows, there is an encoding known as "mbcs", which uses an
 | ||
|  | encoding specific to your current locale.  In many cases, and particularly when
 | ||
|  | working with COM, this may be an appropriate default encoding to use.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Sequences (Tuples/Lists)
 | ||
|  | ========================
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I convert between tuples and lists?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The type constructor ``tuple(seq)`` converts any sequence (actually, any
 | ||
|  | iterable) into a tuple with the same items in the same order.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For example, ``tuple([1, 2, 3])`` yields ``(1, 2, 3)`` and ``tuple('abc')``
 | ||
|  | yields ``('a', 'b', 'c')``.  If the argument is a tuple, it does not make a copy
 | ||
|  | but returns the same object, so it is cheap to call :func:`tuple` when you
 | ||
|  | aren't sure that an object is already a tuple.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The type constructor ``list(seq)`` converts any sequence or iterable into a list
 | ||
|  | with the same items in the same order.  For example, ``list((1, 2, 3))`` yields
 | ||
|  | ``[1, 2, 3]`` and ``list('abc')`` yields ``['a', 'b', 'c']``.  If the argument
 | ||
|  | is a list, it makes a copy just like ``seq[:]`` would.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What's a negative index?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Python sequences are indexed with positive numbers and negative numbers.  For
 | ||
|  | positive numbers 0 is the first index 1 is the second index and so forth.  For
 | ||
|  | negative indices -1 is the last index and -2 is the penultimate (next to last)
 | ||
|  | index and so forth.  Think of ``seq[-n]`` as the same as ``seq[len(seq)-n]``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Using negative indices can be very convenient.  For example ``S[:-1]`` is all of
 | ||
|  | the string except for its last character, which is useful for removing the
 | ||
|  | trailing newline from a string.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I iterate over a sequence in reverse order?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Use the :func:`reversed` builtin function, which is new in Python 2.4::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    for x in reversed(sequence):
 | ||
|  |        ... # do something with x...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This won't touch your original sequence, but build a new copy with reversed
 | ||
|  | order to iterate over.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | With Python 2.3, you can use an extended slice syntax::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    for x in sequence[::-1]:
 | ||
|  |        ... # do something with x...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do you remove duplicates from a list?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | See the Python Cookbook for a long discussion of many ways to do this:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     http://aspn.activestate.com/ASPN/Cookbook/Python/Recipe/52560
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If you don't mind reordering the list, sort it and then scan from the end of the
 | ||
|  | list, deleting duplicates as you go::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    if List:
 | ||
|  |        List.sort()
 | ||
|  |        last = List[-1]
 | ||
|  |        for i in range(len(List)-2, -1, -1):
 | ||
|  |            if last == List[i]:
 | ||
|  |                del List[i]
 | ||
|  |            else:
 | ||
|  |                last = List[i]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If all elements of the list may be used as dictionary keys (i.e. they are all
 | ||
|  | hashable) this is often faster ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    d = {}
 | ||
|  |    for x in List:
 | ||
|  |        d[x] = x
 | ||
|  |    List = d.values()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In Python 2.5 and later, the following is possible instead::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    List = list(set(List))
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This converts the list into a set, thereby removing duplicates, and then back
 | ||
|  | into a list.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do you make an array in Python?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Use a list::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    ["this", 1, "is", "an", "array"]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Lists are equivalent to C or Pascal arrays in their time complexity; the primary
 | ||
|  | difference is that a Python list can contain objects of many different types.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The ``array`` module also provides methods for creating arrays of fixed types
 | ||
|  | with compact representations, but they are slower to index than lists.  Also
 | ||
|  | note that the Numeric extensions and others define array-like structures with
 | ||
|  | various characteristics as well.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | To get Lisp-style linked lists, you can emulate cons cells using tuples::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    lisp_list = ("like",  ("this",  ("example", None) ) )
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If mutability is desired, you could use lists instead of tuples.  Here the
 | ||
|  | analogue of lisp car is ``lisp_list[0]`` and the analogue of cdr is
 | ||
|  | ``lisp_list[1]``.  Only do this if you're sure you really need to, because it's
 | ||
|  | usually a lot slower than using Python lists.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I create a multidimensional list?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You probably tried to make a multidimensional array like this::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    A = [[None] * 2] * 3
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This looks correct if you print it::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> A
 | ||
|  |    [[None, None], [None, None], [None, None]]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | But when you assign a value, it shows up in multiple places:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |   >>> A[0][0] = 5
 | ||
|  |   >>> A
 | ||
|  |   [[5, None], [5, None], [5, None]]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The reason is that replicating a list with ``*`` doesn't create copies, it only
 | ||
|  | creates references to the existing objects.  The ``*3`` creates a list
 | ||
|  | containing 3 references to the same list of length two.  Changes to one row will
 | ||
|  | show in all rows, which is almost certainly not what you want.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The suggested approach is to create a list of the desired length first and then
 | ||
|  | fill in each element with a newly created list::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    A = [None] * 3
 | ||
|  |    for i in range(3):
 | ||
|  |        A[i] = [None] * 2
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This generates a list containing 3 different lists of length two.  You can also
 | ||
|  | use a list comprehension::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    w, h = 2, 3
 | ||
|  |    A = [[None] * w for i in range(h)]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Or, you can use an extension that provides a matrix datatype; `Numeric Python
 | ||
|  | <http://www.pfdubois.com/numpy/>`_ is the best known.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I apply a method to a sequence of objects?
 | ||
|  | -------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Use a list comprehension::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    result = [obj.method() for obj in List]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | More generically, you can try the following function::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def method_map(objects, method, arguments):
 | ||
|  |        """method_map([a,b], "meth", (1,2)) gives [a.meth(1,2), b.meth(1,2)]"""
 | ||
|  |        nobjects = len(objects)
 | ||
|  |        methods = map(getattr, objects, [method]*nobjects)
 | ||
|  |        return map(apply, methods, [arguments]*nobjects)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Dictionaries
 | ||
|  | ============
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I get a dictionary to display its keys in a consistent order?
 | ||
|  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You can't.  Dictionaries store their keys in an unpredictable order, so the
 | ||
|  | display order of a dictionary's elements will be similarly unpredictable.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This can be frustrating if you want to save a printable version to a file, make
 | ||
|  | some changes and then compare it with some other printed dictionary.  In this
 | ||
|  | case, use the ``pprint`` module to pretty-print the dictionary; the items will
 | ||
|  | be presented in order sorted by the key.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | A more complicated solution is to subclass ``UserDict.UserDict`` to create a
 | ||
|  | ``SortedDict`` class that prints itself in a predictable order.  Here's one
 | ||
|  | simpleminded implementation of such a class::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    import UserDict, string
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class SortedDict(UserDict.UserDict):
 | ||
|  |        def __repr__(self):
 | ||
|  |            result = []
 | ||
|  |            append = result.append
 | ||
|  |            keys = self.data.keys()
 | ||
|  |            keys.sort()
 | ||
|  |            for k in keys:
 | ||
|  |                append("%s: %s" % (`k`, `self.data[k]`))
 | ||
|  |            return "{%s}" % string.join(result, ", ")
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |      __str__ = __repr__
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This will work for many common situations you might encounter, though it's far
 | ||
|  | from a perfect solution. The largest flaw is that if some values in the
 | ||
|  | dictionary are also dictionaries, their values won't be presented in any
 | ||
|  | particular order.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | I want to do a complicated sort: can you do a Schwartzian Transform in Python?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The technique, attributed to Randal Schwartz of the Perl community, sorts the
 | ||
|  | elements of a list by a metric which maps each element to its "sort value". In
 | ||
|  | Python, just use the ``key`` argument for the ``sort()`` method::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    Isorted = L[:]
 | ||
|  |    Isorted.sort(key=lambda s: int(s[10:15]))
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The ``key`` argument is new in Python 2.4, for older versions this kind of
 | ||
|  | sorting is quite simple to do with list comprehensions.  To sort a list of
 | ||
|  | strings by their uppercase values::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |   tmp1 = [(x.upper(), x) for x in L] # Schwartzian transform
 | ||
|  |   tmp1.sort()
 | ||
|  |   Usorted = [x[1] for x in tmp1]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | To sort by the integer value of a subfield extending from positions 10-15 in
 | ||
|  | each string::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |   tmp2 = [(int(s[10:15]), s) for s in L] # Schwartzian transform
 | ||
|  |   tmp2.sort()
 | ||
|  |   Isorted = [x[1] for x in tmp2]
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Note that Isorted may also be computed by ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def intfield(s):
 | ||
|  |        return int(s[10:15])
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def Icmp(s1, s2):
 | ||
|  |        return cmp(intfield(s1), intfield(s2))
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    Isorted = L[:]
 | ||
|  |    Isorted.sort(Icmp)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | but since this method calls ``intfield()`` many times for each element of L, it
 | ||
|  | is slower than the Schwartzian Transform.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I sort one list by values from another list?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Merge them into a single list of tuples, sort the resulting list, and then pick
 | ||
|  | out the element you want. ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> list1 = ["what", "I'm", "sorting", "by"]
 | ||
|  |    >>> list2 = ["something", "else", "to", "sort"]
 | ||
|  |    >>> pairs = zip(list1, list2)
 | ||
|  |    >>> pairs
 | ||
|  |    [('what', 'something'), ("I'm", 'else'), ('sorting', 'to'), ('by', 'sort')]
 | ||
|  |    >>> pairs.sort()
 | ||
|  |    >>> result = [ x[1] for x in pairs ]
 | ||
|  |    >>> result
 | ||
|  |    ['else', 'sort', 'to', 'something']
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | An alternative for the last step is::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    result = []
 | ||
|  |    for p in pairs: result.append(p[1])
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If you find this more legible, you might prefer to use this instead of the final
 | ||
|  | list comprehension.  However, it is almost twice as slow for long lists.  Why?
 | ||
|  | First, the ``append()`` operation has to reallocate memory, and while it uses
 | ||
|  | some tricks to avoid doing that each time, it still has to do it occasionally,
 | ||
|  | and that costs quite a bit.  Second, the expression "result.append" requires an
 | ||
|  | extra attribute lookup, and third, there's a speed reduction from having to make
 | ||
|  | all those function calls.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Objects
 | ||
|  | =======
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What is a class?
 | ||
|  | ----------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | A class is the particular object type created by executing a class statement.
 | ||
|  | Class objects are used as templates to create instance objects, which embody
 | ||
|  | both the data (attributes) and code (methods) specific to a datatype.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | A class can be based on one or more other classes, called its base class(es). It
 | ||
|  | then inherits the attributes and methods of its base classes. This allows an
 | ||
|  | object model to be successively refined by inheritance.  You might have a
 | ||
|  | generic ``Mailbox`` class that provides basic accessor methods for a mailbox,
 | ||
|  | and subclasses such as ``MboxMailbox``, ``MaildirMailbox``, ``OutlookMailbox``
 | ||
|  | that handle various specific mailbox formats.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What is a method?
 | ||
|  | -----------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | A method is a function on some object ``x`` that you normally call as
 | ||
|  | ``x.name(arguments...)``.  Methods are defined as functions inside the class
 | ||
|  | definition::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class C:
 | ||
|  |        def meth (self, arg):
 | ||
|  |            return arg * 2 + self.attribute
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What is self?
 | ||
|  | -------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Self is merely a conventional name for the first argument of a method.  A method
 | ||
|  | defined as ``meth(self, a, b, c)`` should be called as ``x.meth(a, b, c)`` for
 | ||
|  | some instance ``x`` of the class in which the definition occurs; the called
 | ||
|  | method will think it is called as ``meth(x, a, b, c)``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | See also :ref:`why-self`.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I check if an object is an instance of a given class or of a subclass of it?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Use the built-in function ``isinstance(obj, cls)``.  You can check if an object
 | ||
|  | is an instance of any of a number of classes by providing a tuple instead of a
 | ||
|  | single class, e.g. ``isinstance(obj, (class1, class2, ...))``, and can also
 | ||
|  | check whether an object is one of Python's built-in types, e.g.
 | ||
|  | ``isinstance(obj, str)`` or ``isinstance(obj, (int, long, float, complex))``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Note that most programs do not use :func:`isinstance` on user-defined classes
 | ||
|  | very often.  If you are developing the classes yourself, a more proper
 | ||
|  | object-oriented style is to define methods on the classes that encapsulate a
 | ||
|  | particular behaviour, instead of checking the object's class and doing a
 | ||
|  | different thing based on what class it is.  For example, if you have a function
 | ||
|  | that does something::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def search (obj):
 | ||
|  |        if isinstance(obj, Mailbox):
 | ||
|  |            # ... code to search a mailbox
 | ||
|  |        elif isinstance(obj, Document):
 | ||
|  |            # ... code to search a document
 | ||
|  |        elif ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | A better approach is to define a ``search()`` method on all the classes and just
 | ||
|  | call it::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class Mailbox:
 | ||
|  |        def search(self):
 | ||
|  |            # ... code to search a mailbox
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class Document:
 | ||
|  |        def search(self):
 | ||
|  |            # ... code to search a document
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    obj.search()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | What is delegation?
 | ||
|  | -------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Delegation is an object oriented technique (also called a design pattern).
 | ||
|  | Let's say you have an object ``x`` and want to change the behaviour of just one
 | ||
|  | of its methods.  You can create a new class that provides a new implementation
 | ||
|  | of the method you're interested in changing and delegates all other methods to
 | ||
|  | the corresponding method of ``x``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Python programmers can easily implement delegation.  For example, the following
 | ||
|  | class implements a class that behaves like a file but converts all written data
 | ||
|  | to uppercase::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class UpperOut:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def __init__(self, outfile):
 | ||
|  |            self._outfile = outfile
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def write(self, s):
 | ||
|  |            self._outfile.write(s.upper())
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def __getattr__(self, name):
 | ||
|  |            return getattr(self._outfile, name)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Here the ``UpperOut`` class redefines the ``write()`` method to convert the
 | ||
|  | argument string to uppercase before calling the underlying
 | ||
|  | ``self.__outfile.write()`` method.  All other methods are delegated to the
 | ||
|  | underlying ``self.__outfile`` object.  The delegation is accomplished via the
 | ||
|  | ``__getattr__`` method; consult :ref:`the language reference <attribute-access>`
 | ||
|  | for more information about controlling attribute access.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Note that for more general cases delegation can get trickier. When attributes
 | ||
|  | must be set as well as retrieved, the class must define a :meth:`__setattr__`
 | ||
|  | method too, and it must do so carefully.  The basic implementation of
 | ||
|  | :meth:`__setattr__` is roughly equivalent to the following::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class X:
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  |        def __setattr__(self, name, value):
 | ||
|  |            self.__dict__[name] = value
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Most :meth:`__setattr__` implementations must modify ``self.__dict__`` to store
 | ||
|  | local state for self without causing an infinite recursion.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I call a method defined in a base class from a derived class that overrides it?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If you're using new-style classes, use the built-in :func:`super` function::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class Derived(Base):
 | ||
|  |        def meth (self):
 | ||
|  |            super(Derived, self).meth()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If you're using classic classes: For a class definition such as ``class
 | ||
|  | Derived(Base): ...`` you can call method ``meth()`` defined in ``Base`` (or one
 | ||
|  | of ``Base``'s base classes) as ``Base.meth(self, arguments...)``.  Here,
 | ||
|  | ``Base.meth`` is an unbound method, so you need to provide the ``self``
 | ||
|  | argument.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I organize my code to make it easier to change the base class?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You could define an alias for the base class, assign the real base class to it
 | ||
|  | before your class definition, and use the alias throughout your class.  Then all
 | ||
|  | you have to change is the value assigned to the alias.  Incidentally, this trick
 | ||
|  | is also handy if you want to decide dynamically (e.g. depending on availability
 | ||
|  | of resources) which base class to use.  Example::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    BaseAlias = <real base class>
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class Derived(BaseAlias):
 | ||
|  |        def meth(self):
 | ||
|  |            BaseAlias.meth(self)
 | ||
|  |            ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I create static class data and static class methods?
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Static data (in the sense of C++ or Java) is easy; static methods (again in the
 | ||
|  | sense of C++ or Java) are not supported directly.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For static data, simply define a class attribute.  To assign a new value to the
 | ||
|  | attribute, you have to explicitly use the class name in the assignment::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class C:
 | ||
|  |        count = 0   # number of times C.__init__ called
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def __init__(self):
 | ||
|  |            C.count = C.count + 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        def getcount(self):
 | ||
|  |            return C.count  # or return self.count
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | ``c.count`` also refers to ``C.count`` for any ``c`` such that ``isinstance(c,
 | ||
|  | C)`` holds, unless overridden by ``c`` itself or by some class on the base-class
 | ||
|  | search path from ``c.__class__`` back to ``C``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Caution: within a method of C, an assignment like ``self.count = 42`` creates a
 | ||
|  | new and unrelated instance vrbl named "count" in ``self``'s own dict.  Rebinding
 | ||
|  | of a class-static data name must always specify the class whether inside a
 | ||
|  | method or not::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    C.count = 314
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Static methods are possible since Python 2.2::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class C:
 | ||
|  |        def static(arg1, arg2, arg3):
 | ||
|  |            # No 'self' parameter!
 | ||
|  |            ...
 | ||
|  |        static = staticmethod(static)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | With Python 2.4's decorators, this can also be written as ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class C:
 | ||
|  |        @staticmethod
 | ||
|  |        def static(arg1, arg2, arg3):
 | ||
|  |            # No 'self' parameter!
 | ||
|  |            ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | However, a far more straightforward way to get the effect of a static method is
 | ||
|  | via a simple module-level function::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def getcount():
 | ||
|  |        return C.count
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If your code is structured so as to define one class (or tightly related class
 | ||
|  | hierarchy) per module, this supplies the desired encapsulation.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I overload constructors (or methods) in Python?
 | ||
|  | -------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This answer actually applies to all methods, but the question usually comes up
 | ||
|  | first in the context of constructors.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In C++ you'd write
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | .. code-block:: c
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |     class C {
 | ||
|  |         C() { cout << "No arguments\n"; }
 | ||
|  |         C(int i) { cout << "Argument is " << i << "\n"; }
 | ||
|  |     }
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | In Python you have to write a single constructor that catches all cases using
 | ||
|  | default arguments.  For example::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    class C:
 | ||
|  |        def __init__(self, i=None):
 | ||
|  |            if i is None:
 | ||
|  |                print "No arguments"
 | ||
|  |            else:
 | ||
|  |                print "Argument is", i
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This is not entirely equivalent, but close enough in practice.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You could also try a variable-length argument list, e.g. ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def __init__(self, *args):
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The same approach works for all method definitions.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | I try to use __spam and I get an error about _SomeClassName__spam.
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Variable names with double leading underscores are "mangled" to provide a simple
 | ||
|  | but effective way to define class private variables.  Any identifier of the form
 | ||
|  | ``__spam`` (at least two leading underscores, at most one trailing underscore)
 | ||
|  | is textually replaced with ``_classname__spam``, where ``classname`` is the
 | ||
|  | current class name with any leading underscores stripped.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This doesn't guarantee privacy: an outside user can still deliberately access
 | ||
|  | the "_classname__spam" attribute, and private values are visible in the object's
 | ||
|  | ``__dict__``.  Many Python programmers never bother to use private variable
 | ||
|  | names at all.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | My class defines __del__ but it is not called when I delete the object.
 | ||
|  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | There are several possible reasons for this.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The del statement does not necessarily call :meth:`__del__` -- it simply
 | ||
|  | decrements the object's reference count, and if this reaches zero
 | ||
|  | :meth:`__del__` is called.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If your data structures contain circular links (e.g. a tree where each child has
 | ||
|  | a parent reference and each parent has a list of children) the reference counts
 | ||
|  | will never go back to zero.  Once in a while Python runs an algorithm to detect
 | ||
|  | such cycles, but the garbage collector might run some time after the last
 | ||
|  | reference to your data structure vanishes, so your :meth:`__del__` method may be
 | ||
|  | called at an inconvenient and random time. This is inconvenient if you're trying
 | ||
|  | to reproduce a problem. Worse, the order in which object's :meth:`__del__`
 | ||
|  | methods are executed is arbitrary.  You can run :func:`gc.collect` to force a
 | ||
|  | collection, but there *are* pathological cases where objects will never be
 | ||
|  | collected.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Despite the cycle collector, it's still a good idea to define an explicit
 | ||
|  | ``close()`` method on objects to be called whenever you're done with them.  The
 | ||
|  | ``close()`` method can then remove attributes that refer to subobjecs.  Don't
 | ||
|  | call :meth:`__del__` directly -- :meth:`__del__` should call ``close()`` and
 | ||
|  | ``close()`` should make sure that it can be called more than once for the same
 | ||
|  | object.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Another way to avoid cyclical references is to use the :mod:`weakref` module,
 | ||
|  | which allows you to point to objects without incrementing their reference count.
 | ||
|  | Tree data structures, for instance, should use weak references for their parent
 | ||
|  | and sibling references (if they need them!).
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If the object has ever been a local variable in a function that caught an
 | ||
|  | expression in an except clause, chances are that a reference to the object still
 | ||
|  | exists in that function's stack frame as contained in the stack trace.
 | ||
|  | Normally, calling :func:`sys.exc_clear` will take care of this by clearing the
 | ||
|  | last recorded exception.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Finally, if your :meth:`__del__` method raises an exception, a warning message
 | ||
|  | is printed to :data:`sys.stderr`.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I get a list of all instances of a given class?
 | ||
|  | ------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Python does not keep track of all instances of a class (or of a built-in type).
 | ||
|  | You can program the class's constructor to keep track of all instances by
 | ||
|  | keeping a list of weak references to each instance.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Modules
 | ||
|  | =======
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I create a .pyc file?
 | ||
|  | ----------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | When a module is imported for the first time (or when the source is more recent
 | ||
|  | than the current compiled file) a ``.pyc`` file containing the compiled code
 | ||
|  | should be created in the same directory as the ``.py`` file.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | One reason that a ``.pyc`` file may not be created is permissions problems with
 | ||
|  | the directory. This can happen, for example, if you develop as one user but run
 | ||
|  | as another, such as if you are testing with a web server.  Creation of a .pyc
 | ||
|  | file is automatic if you're importing a module and Python has the ability
 | ||
|  | (permissions, free space, etc...) to write the compiled module back to the
 | ||
|  | directory.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Running Python on a top level script is not considered an import and no ``.pyc``
 | ||
|  | will be created.  For example, if you have a top-level module ``abc.py`` that
 | ||
|  | imports another module ``xyz.py``, when you run abc, ``xyz.pyc`` will be created
 | ||
|  | since xyz is imported, but no ``abc.pyc`` file will be created since ``abc.py``
 | ||
|  | isn't being imported.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | If you need to create abc.pyc -- that is, to create a .pyc file for a module
 | ||
|  | that is not imported -- you can, using the :mod:`py_compile` and
 | ||
|  | :mod:`compileall` modules.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The :mod:`py_compile` module can manually compile any module.  One way is to use
 | ||
|  | the ``compile()`` function in that module interactively::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> import py_compile
 | ||
|  |    >>> py_compile.compile('abc.py')
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | This will write the ``.pyc`` to the same location as ``abc.py`` (or you can
 | ||
|  | override that with the optional parameter ``cfile``).
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | You can also automatically compile all files in a directory or directories using
 | ||
|  | the :mod:`compileall` module.  You can do it from the shell prompt by running
 | ||
|  | ``compileall.py`` and providing the path of a directory containing Python files
 | ||
|  | to compile::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |        python -m compileall .
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How do I find the current module name?
 | ||
|  | --------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | A module can find out its own module name by looking at the predefined global
 | ||
|  | variable ``__name__``.  If this has the value ``'__main__'``, the program is
 | ||
|  | running as a script.  Many modules that are usually used by importing them also
 | ||
|  | provide a command-line interface or a self-test, and only execute this code
 | ||
|  | after checking ``__name__``::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    def main():
 | ||
|  |        print 'Running test...'
 | ||
|  |        ...
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    if __name__ == '__main__':
 | ||
|  |        main()
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | How can I have modules that mutually import each other?
 | ||
|  | -------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Suppose you have the following modules:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | foo.py::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    from bar import bar_var
 | ||
|  |    foo_var = 1
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | bar.py::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    from foo import foo_var
 | ||
|  |    bar_var = 2
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The problem is that the interpreter will perform the following steps:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | * main imports foo
 | ||
|  | * Empty globals for foo are created
 | ||
|  | * foo is compiled and starts executing
 | ||
|  | * foo imports bar
 | ||
|  | * Empty globals for bar are created
 | ||
|  | * bar is compiled and starts executing
 | ||
|  | * bar imports foo (which is a no-op since there already is a module named foo)
 | ||
|  | * bar.foo_var = foo.foo_var
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The last step fails, because Python isn't done with interpreting ``foo`` yet and
 | ||
|  | the global symbol dictionary for ``foo`` is still empty.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The same thing happens when you use ``import foo``, and then try to access
 | ||
|  | ``foo.foo_var`` in global code.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | There are (at least) three possible workarounds for this problem.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Guido van Rossum recommends avoiding all uses of ``from <module> import ...``,
 | ||
|  | and placing all code inside functions.  Initializations of global variables and
 | ||
|  | class variables should use constants or built-in functions only.  This means
 | ||
|  | everything from an imported module is referenced as ``<module>.<name>``.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Jim Roskind suggests performing steps in the following order in each module:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | * exports (globals, functions, and classes that don't need imported base
 | ||
|  |   classes)
 | ||
|  | * ``import`` statements
 | ||
|  | * active code (including globals that are initialized from imported values).
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | van Rossum doesn't like this approach much because the imports appear in a
 | ||
|  | strange place, but it does work.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Matthias Urlichs recommends restructuring your code so that the recursive import
 | ||
|  | is not necessary in the first place.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | These solutions are not mutually exclusive.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | __import__('x.y.z') returns <module 'x'>; how do I get z?
 | ||
|  | ---------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Try::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    __import__('x.y.z').y.z
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For more realistic situations, you may have to do something like ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    m = __import__(s)
 | ||
|  |    for i in s.split(".")[1:]:
 | ||
|  |        m = getattr(m, i)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | See :mod:`importlib` for a convenience function called
 | ||
|  | :func:`~importlib.import_module`.
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | When I edit an imported module and reimport it, the changes don't show up.  Why does this happen?
 | ||
|  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | For reasons of efficiency as well as consistency, Python only reads the module
 | ||
|  | file on the first time a module is imported.  If it didn't, in a program
 | ||
|  | consisting of many modules where each one imports the same basic module, the
 | ||
|  | basic module would be parsed and re-parsed many times.  To force rereading of a
 | ||
|  | changed module, do this::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    import modname
 | ||
|  |    reload(modname)
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | Warning: this technique is not 100% fool-proof.  In particular, modules
 | ||
|  | containing statements like ::
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    from modname import some_objects
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | will continue to work with the old version of the imported objects.  If the
 | ||
|  | module contains class definitions, existing class instances will *not* be
 | ||
|  | updated to use the new class definition.  This can result in the following
 | ||
|  | paradoxical behaviour:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> import cls
 | ||
|  |    >>> c = cls.C()                # Create an instance of C
 | ||
|  |    >>> reload(cls)
 | ||
|  |    <module 'cls' from 'cls.pyc'>
 | ||
|  |    >>> isinstance(c, cls.C)       # isinstance is false?!?
 | ||
|  |    False
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  | The nature of the problem is made clear if you print out the class objects:
 | ||
|  | 
 | ||
|  |    >>> c.__class__
 | ||
|  |    <class cls.C at 0x7352a0>
 | ||
|  |    >>> cls.C
 | ||
|  |    <class cls.C at 0x4198d0>
 | ||
|  | 
 |