mirror of
				https://github.com/python/cpython.git
				synced 2025-11-03 19:34:08 +00:00 
			
		
		
		
	
		
			
				
	
	
		
			1907 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			68 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			1907 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			68 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			ReStructuredText
		
	
	
	
	
	
:tocdepth: 2
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
===============
 | 
						|
Programming FAQ
 | 
						|
===============
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. only:: html
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   .. 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/card/pylint_manual 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`.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Core Language
 | 
						|
=============
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Why am I getting an UnboundLocalError when the variable has a value?
 | 
						|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
It can be a surprise to get the UnboundLocalError in previously working
 | 
						|
code when it is modified by adding an assignment statement somewhere in
 | 
						|
the body of a function.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This code:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> x = 10
 | 
						|
   >>> def bar():
 | 
						|
   ...     print(x)
 | 
						|
   >>> bar()
 | 
						|
   10
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
works, but this code:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> x = 10
 | 
						|
   >>> def foo():
 | 
						|
   ...     print(x)
 | 
						|
   ...     x += 1
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
results in an UnboundLocalError:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> foo()
 | 
						|
   Traceback (most recent call last):
 | 
						|
     ...
 | 
						|
   UnboundLocalError: local variable 'x' referenced before assignment
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This is because when you make an assignment to a variable in a scope, that
 | 
						|
variable becomes local to that scope and shadows any similarly named variable
 | 
						|
in the outer scope.  Since the last statement in foo assigns a new value to
 | 
						|
``x``, the compiler recognizes it as a local variable.  Consequently when the
 | 
						|
earlier ``print(x)`` attempts to print the uninitialized local variable and
 | 
						|
an error results.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
In the example above you can access the outer scope variable by declaring it
 | 
						|
global:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> x = 10
 | 
						|
   >>> def foobar():
 | 
						|
   ...     global x
 | 
						|
   ...     print(x)
 | 
						|
   ...     x += 1
 | 
						|
   >>> foobar()
 | 
						|
   10
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This explicit declaration is required in order to remind you that (unlike the
 | 
						|
superficially analogous situation with class and instance variables) you are
 | 
						|
actually modifying the value of the variable in the outer scope:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> print(x)
 | 
						|
   11
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
You can do a similar thing in a nested scope using the :keyword:`nonlocal`
 | 
						|
keyword:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> def foo():
 | 
						|
   ...    x = 10
 | 
						|
   ...    def bar():
 | 
						|
   ...        nonlocal x
 | 
						|
   ...        print(x)
 | 
						|
   ...        x += 1
 | 
						|
   ...    bar()
 | 
						|
   ...    print(x)
 | 
						|
   >>> foo()
 | 
						|
   10
 | 
						|
   11
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 built-in function or to a component of
 | 
						|
an imported module.  This clutter would defeat the usefulness of the ``global``
 | 
						|
declaration for identifying side-effects.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Why do lambdas defined in a loop with different values all return the same result?
 | 
						|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Assume you use a for loop to define a few different lambdas (or even plain
 | 
						|
functions), e.g.::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> squares = []
 | 
						|
   >>> for x in range(5):
 | 
						|
   ...    squares.append(lambda: x**2)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This gives you a list that contains 5 lambdas that calculate ``x**2``.  You
 | 
						|
might expect that, when called, they would return, respectively, ``0``, ``1``,
 | 
						|
``4``, ``9``, and ``16``.  However, when you actually try you will see that
 | 
						|
they all return ``16``::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> squares[2]()
 | 
						|
   16
 | 
						|
   >>> squares[4]()
 | 
						|
   16
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This happens because ``x`` is not local to the lambdas, but is defined in
 | 
						|
the outer scope, and it is accessed when the lambda is called --- not when it
 | 
						|
is defined.  At the end of the loop, the value of ``x`` is ``4``, so all the
 | 
						|
functions now return ``4**2``, i.e. ``16``.  You can also verify this by
 | 
						|
changing the value of ``x`` and see how the results of the lambdas change::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> x = 8
 | 
						|
   >>> squares[2]()
 | 
						|
   64
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
In order to avoid this, you need to save the values in variables local to the
 | 
						|
lambdas, so that they don't rely on the value of the global ``x``::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> squares = []
 | 
						|
   >>> for x in range(5):
 | 
						|
   ...    squares.append(lambda n=x: n**2)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Here, ``n=x`` creates a new variable ``n`` local to the lambda and computed
 | 
						|
when the lambda is defined so that it has the same value that ``x`` had at
 | 
						|
that point in the loop.  This means that the value of ``n`` will be ``0``
 | 
						|
in the first lambda, ``1`` in the second, ``2`` in the third, and so on.
 | 
						|
Therefore each lambda will now return the correct result::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> squares[2]()
 | 
						|
   4
 | 
						|
   >>> squares[4]()
 | 
						|
   16
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Note that this behaviour is not peculiar to lambdas, but applies to regular
 | 
						|
functions too.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 ``from . import m2``, even though it's legal.  Write ``from package.sub
 | 
						|
import m2`` instead.  See :pep:`328` for details.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Why are default values shared between objects?
 | 
						|
----------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This type of bug commonly bites neophyte programmers.  Consider this function::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   def foo(mydict={}):  # Danger: shared reference to one dict for all calls
 | 
						|
       ... compute something ...
 | 
						|
       mydict[key] = value
 | 
						|
       return mydict
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The first time you call this function, ``mydict`` contains a single item.  The
 | 
						|
second time, ``mydict`` contains two items because when ``foo()`` begins
 | 
						|
executing, ``mydict`` starts out with an item already in it.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
It is often expected that a function call creates new objects for default
 | 
						|
values. This is not what happens. Default values are created exactly once, when
 | 
						|
the function is defined.  If that object is changed, like the dictionary in this
 | 
						|
example, subsequent calls to the function will refer to this changed object.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
By definition, immutable objects such as numbers, strings, tuples, and ``None``,
 | 
						|
are safe from change. Changes to mutable objects such as dictionaries, lists,
 | 
						|
and class instances can lead to confusion.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Because of this feature, it is good programming practice to not use mutable
 | 
						|
objects as default values.  Instead, use ``None`` as the default value and
 | 
						|
inside the function, check if the parameter is ``None`` and create a new
 | 
						|
list/dictionary/whatever if it is.  For example, don't write::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   def foo(mydict={}):
 | 
						|
       ...
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
but::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   def foo(mydict=None):
 | 
						|
       if mydict is None:
 | 
						|
           mydict = {}  # create a new dict for local namespace
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This feature can be useful.  When you have a function that's time-consuming to
 | 
						|
compute, a common technique is to cache the parameters and the resulting value
 | 
						|
of each call to the function, and return the cached value if the same value is
 | 
						|
requested again.  This is called "memoizing", and can be implemented like this::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   # Callers will never provide a third parameter for this function.
 | 
						|
   def expensive(arg1, arg2, _cache={}):
 | 
						|
       if (arg1, arg2) in _cache:
 | 
						|
           return _cache[(arg1, arg2)]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
       # Calculate the value
 | 
						|
       result = ... expensive computation ...
 | 
						|
       _cache[(arg1, arg2)] = result           # Store result in the cache
 | 
						|
       return result
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
You could use a global variable containing a dictionary instead of the default
 | 
						|
value; it's a matter of taste.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. index::
 | 
						|
   single: argument; difference from parameter
 | 
						|
   single: parameter; difference from argument
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. _faq-argument-vs-parameter:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
What is the difference between arguments and parameters?
 | 
						|
--------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
:term:`Parameters <parameter>` are defined by the names that appear in a
 | 
						|
function definition, whereas :term:`arguments <argument>` are the values
 | 
						|
actually passed to a function when calling it.  Parameters define what types of
 | 
						|
arguments a function can accept.  For example, given the function definition::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   def func(foo, bar=None, **kwargs):
 | 
						|
       pass
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
*foo*, *bar* and *kwargs* are parameters of ``func``.  However, when calling
 | 
						|
``func``, for example::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   func(42, bar=314, extra=somevar)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
the values ``42``, ``314``, and ``somevar`` are arguments.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Why did changing list 'y' also change list 'x'?
 | 
						|
------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you wrote code like::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> x = []
 | 
						|
   >>> y = x
 | 
						|
   >>> y.append(10)
 | 
						|
   >>> y
 | 
						|
   [10]
 | 
						|
   >>> x
 | 
						|
   [10]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
you might be wondering why appending an element to ``y`` changed ``x`` too.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
There are two factors that produce this result:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
1) Variables are simply names that refer to objects.  Doing ``y = x`` doesn't
 | 
						|
   create a copy of the list -- it creates a new variable ``y`` that refers to
 | 
						|
   the same object ``x`` refers to.  This means that there is only one object
 | 
						|
   (the list), and both ``x`` and ``y`` refer to it.
 | 
						|
2) Lists are :term:`mutable`, which means that you can change their content.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
After the call to :meth:`~list.append`, the content of the mutable object has
 | 
						|
changed from ``[]`` to ``[10]``.  Since both the variables refer to the same
 | 
						|
object, accessing either one of them accesses the modified value ``[10]``.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If we instead assign an immutable object to ``x``::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> x = 5  # ints are immutable
 | 
						|
   >>> y = x
 | 
						|
   >>> x = x + 1  # 5 can't be mutated, we are creating a new object here
 | 
						|
   >>> x
 | 
						|
   6
 | 
						|
   >>> y
 | 
						|
   5
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
we can see that in this case ``x`` and ``y`` are not equal anymore.  This is
 | 
						|
because integers are :term:`immutable`, and when we do ``x = x + 1`` we are not
 | 
						|
mutating the int ``5`` by incrementing its value; instead, we are creating a
 | 
						|
new object (the int ``6``) and assigning it to ``x`` (that is, changing which
 | 
						|
object ``x`` refers to).  After this assignment we have two objects (the ints
 | 
						|
``6`` and ``5``) and two variables that refer to them (``x`` now refers to
 | 
						|
``6`` but ``y`` still refers to ``5``).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Some operations (for example ``y.append(10)`` and ``y.sort()``) mutate the
 | 
						|
object, whereas superficially similar operations (for example ``y = y + [10]``
 | 
						|
and ``sorted(y)``) create a new object.  In general in Python (and in all cases
 | 
						|
in the standard library) a method that mutates an object will return ``None``
 | 
						|
to help avoid getting the two types of operations confused.  So if you
 | 
						|
mistakenly write ``y.sort()`` thinking it will give you a sorted copy of ``y``,
 | 
						|
you'll instead end up with ``None``, which will likely cause your program to
 | 
						|
generate an easily diagnosed error.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
However, there is one class of operations where the same operation sometimes
 | 
						|
has different behaviors with different types:  the augmented assignment
 | 
						|
operators.  For example, ``+=`` mutates lists but not tuples or ints (``a_list
 | 
						|
+= [1, 2, 3]`` is equivalent to ``a_list.extend([1, 2, 3])`` and mutates
 | 
						|
``a_list``, whereas ``some_tuple += (1, 2, 3)`` and ``some_int += 1`` create
 | 
						|
new objects).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
In other words:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
* If we have a mutable object (:class:`list`, :class:`dict`, :class:`set`,
 | 
						|
  etc.), we can use some specific operations to mutate it and all the variables
 | 
						|
  that refer to it will see the change.
 | 
						|
* If we have an immutable object (:class:`str`, :class:`int`, :class:`tuple`,
 | 
						|
  etc.), all the variables that refer to it will always see the same value,
 | 
						|
  but operations that transform that value into a new value always return a new
 | 
						|
  object.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you want to know if two variables refer to the same object or not, you can
 | 
						|
use the :keyword:`is` operator, or the built-in function :func:`id`.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 object at 0x16D07CC>
 | 
						|
   print(a)
 | 
						|
   <__main__.A object at 0x16D07CC>
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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, 'a')
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 ("b", "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, there is. The syntax is as follows::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   [on_true] if [expression] else [on_false]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   x, y = 50, 25
 | 
						|
   small = x if x < y else y
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Before this syntax was introduced in Python 2.5, a common idiom was to use
 | 
						|
logical operators::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   [expression] and [on_true] or [on_false]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
However, this idiom is unsafe, as it can give wrong results when *on_true*
 | 
						|
has a false boolean value.  Therefore, it is always better to use
 | 
						|
the ``... if ... else ...`` form.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   from functools import reduce
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   # Primes < 1000
 | 
						|
   print(list(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(list(map(lambda x,f=lambda x,f:(f(x-1,f)+f(x-2,f)) if x>1 else 1:
 | 
						|
   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, and then a lower
 | 
						|
or uppercase "o".  For example, to set the variable "a" to the octal value "10"
 | 
						|
(8 in decimal), type::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> a = 0o10
 | 
						|
   >>> 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 '0o' 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 does not allow
 | 
						|
leading '0' in a decimal number (except '0').
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 :func:`hex` or :func:`oct`.  For fancy formatting, see
 | 
						|
the :ref:`string-formatting` section, e.g. ``"{:04d}".format(144)`` yields
 | 
						|
``'0144'`` and ``"{:.3f}".format(1.0/3.0)`` yields ``'0.333'``.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
How do I modify a string in place?
 | 
						|
----------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
You can't, because strings are immutable.  In most situations, you should
 | 
						|
simply construct a new string from the various parts you want to assemble
 | 
						|
it from.  However, if you need an object with the ability to modify in-place
 | 
						|
unicode data, try using a :class:`io.StringIO` object or the :mod:`array`
 | 
						|
module::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> import io
 | 
						|
   >>> s = "Hello, world"
 | 
						|
   >>> sio = io.StringIO(s)
 | 
						|
   >>> sio.getvalue()
 | 
						|
   'Hello, world'
 | 
						|
   >>> sio.seek(7)
 | 
						|
   7
 | 
						|
   >>> sio.write("there!")
 | 
						|
   6
 | 
						|
   >>> sio.getvalue()
 | 
						|
   'Hello, there!'
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> import array
 | 
						|
   >>> a = array.array('u', s)
 | 
						|
   >>> print(a)
 | 
						|
   array('u', 'Hello, world')
 | 
						|
   >>> a[0] = 'y'
 | 
						|
   >>> print(a)
 | 
						|
   array('u', 'yello, world')
 | 
						|
   >>> a.tounicode()
 | 
						|
   '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?
 | 
						|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
You can use ``S.rstrip("\r\n")`` to remove all occurrences 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.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 are more powerful
 | 
						|
than C's :c:func:`sscanf` and better suited for the task.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
What does 'UnicodeDecodeError' or 'UnicodeEncodeError' error  mean?
 | 
						|
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
See the :ref:`unicode-howto`.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Performance
 | 
						|
===========
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
My program is too slow. How do I speed it up?
 | 
						|
---------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
That's a tough one, in general.  First, here are a list of things to
 | 
						|
remember before diving further:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
* Performance characteristics vary across Python implementations.  This FAQ
 | 
						|
  focusses on :term:`CPython`.
 | 
						|
* Behaviour can vary across operating systems, especially when talking about
 | 
						|
  I/O or multi-threading.
 | 
						|
* You should always find the hot spots in your program *before* attempting to
 | 
						|
  optimize any code (see the :mod:`profile` module).
 | 
						|
* Writing benchmark scripts will allow you to iterate quickly when searching
 | 
						|
  for improvements (see the :mod:`timeit` module).
 | 
						|
* It is highly recommended to have good code coverage (through unit testing
 | 
						|
  or any other technique) before potentially introducing regressions hidden
 | 
						|
  in sophisticated optimizations.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
That being said, there are many tricks to speed up Python code.  Here are
 | 
						|
some general principles which go a long way towards reaching acceptable
 | 
						|
performance levels:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
* Making your algorithms faster (or changing to faster ones) can yield
 | 
						|
  much larger benefits than trying to sprinkle micro-optimization tricks
 | 
						|
  all over your code.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
* Use the right data structures.  Study documentation for the :ref:`bltin-types`
 | 
						|
  and the :mod:`collections` module.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
* When the standard library provides a primitive for doing something, it is
 | 
						|
  likely (although not guaranteed) to be faster than any alternative you
 | 
						|
  may come up with.  This is doubly true for primitives written in C, such
 | 
						|
  as builtins and some extension types.  For example, be sure to use
 | 
						|
  either the :meth:`list.sort` built-in method or the related :func:`sorted`
 | 
						|
  function to do sorting (and see the
 | 
						|
  `sorting mini-HOWTO <http://wiki.python.org/moin/HowTo/Sorting>`_ for examples
 | 
						|
  of moderately advanced usage).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
* Abstractions tend to create indirections and force the interpreter to work
 | 
						|
  more.  If the levels of indirection outweigh the amount of useful work
 | 
						|
  done, your program will be slower.  You should avoid excessive abstraction,
 | 
						|
  especially under the form of tiny functions or methods (which are also often
 | 
						|
  detrimental to readability).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you have reached the limit of what pure Python can allow, there are tools
 | 
						|
to take you further away.  For example, `Cython <http://cython.org>`_ can
 | 
						|
compile a slightly modified version of Python code into a C extension, and
 | 
						|
can be used on many different platforms.  Cython can take advantage of
 | 
						|
compilation (and optional type annotations) to make your code significantly
 | 
						|
faster than when interpreted.  If you are confident in your C programming
 | 
						|
skills, you can also :ref:`write a C extension module <extending-index>`
 | 
						|
yourself.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. seealso::
 | 
						|
   The wiki page devoted to `performance tips
 | 
						|
   <http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSpeed/PerformanceTips>`_.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. _efficient_string_concatenation:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
What is the most efficient way to concatenate many strings together?
 | 
						|
--------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
:class:`str` and :class:`bytes` objects are immutable, therefore concatenating
 | 
						|
many strings together is inefficient as each concatenation creates a new
 | 
						|
object.  In the general case, the total runtime cost is quadratic in the
 | 
						|
total string length.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
To accumulate many :class:`str` objects, the recommended idiom is to place
 | 
						|
them into a list and call :meth:`str.join` at the end::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   chunks = []
 | 
						|
   for s in my_strings:
 | 
						|
       chunks.append(s)
 | 
						|
   result = ''.join(chunks)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
(another reasonably efficient idiom is to use :class:`io.StringIO`)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
To accumulate many :class:`bytes` objects, the recommended idiom is to extend
 | 
						|
a :class:`bytearray` object using in-place concatenation (the ``+=`` operator)::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   result = bytearray()
 | 
						|
   for b in my_bytes_objects:
 | 
						|
       result += b
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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` built-in 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 mylist:
 | 
						|
       mylist.sort()
 | 
						|
       last = mylist[-1]
 | 
						|
       for i in range(len(mylist)-2, -1, -1):
 | 
						|
           if last == mylist[i]:
 | 
						|
               del mylist[i]
 | 
						|
           else:
 | 
						|
               last = mylist[i]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If all elements of the list may be used as set keys (i.e. they are all
 | 
						|
:term:`hashable`) this is often faster ::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   mylist = list(set(mylist))
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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.numpy.org/>`_ 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 mylist]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. _faq-augmented-assignment-tuple-error:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Why does a_tuple[i] += ['item'] raise an exception when the addition works?
 | 
						|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This is because of a combination of the fact that augmented assignment
 | 
						|
operators are *assignment* operators, and the difference between mutable and
 | 
						|
immutable objects in Python.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This discussion applies in general when augmented assignment operators are
 | 
						|
applied to elements of a tuple that point to mutable objects, but we'll use
 | 
						|
a ``list`` and ``+=`` as our exemplar.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you wrote::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> a_tuple = (1, 2)
 | 
						|
   >>> a_tuple[0] += 1
 | 
						|
   Traceback (most recent call last):
 | 
						|
      ...
 | 
						|
   TypeError: 'tuple' object does not support item assignment
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The reason for the exception should be immediately clear: ``1`` is added to the
 | 
						|
object ``a_tuple[0]`` points to (``1``), producing the result object, ``2``,
 | 
						|
but when we attempt to assign the result of the computation, ``2``, to element
 | 
						|
``0`` of the tuple, we get an error because we can't change what an element of
 | 
						|
a tuple points to.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Under the covers, what this augmented assignment statement is doing is
 | 
						|
approximately this::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> result = a_tuple[0] + 1
 | 
						|
   >>> a_tuple[0] = result
 | 
						|
   Traceback (most recent call last):
 | 
						|
     ...
 | 
						|
   TypeError: 'tuple' object does not support item assignment
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
It is the assignment part of the operation that produces the error, since a
 | 
						|
tuple is immutable.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
When you write something like::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> a_tuple = (['foo'], 'bar')
 | 
						|
   >>> a_tuple[0] += ['item']
 | 
						|
   Traceback (most recent call last):
 | 
						|
     ...
 | 
						|
   TypeError: 'tuple' object does not support item assignment
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The exception is a bit more surprising, and even more surprising is the fact
 | 
						|
that even though there was an error, the append worked::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    >>> a_tuple[0]
 | 
						|
    ['foo', 'item']
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
To see why this happens, you need to know that (a) if an object implements an
 | 
						|
``__iadd__`` magic method, it gets called when the ``+=`` augmented assignment
 | 
						|
is executed, and its return value is what gets used in the assignment statement;
 | 
						|
and (b) for lists, ``__iadd__`` is equivalent to calling ``extend`` on the list
 | 
						|
and returning the list.  That's why we say that for lists, ``+=`` is a
 | 
						|
"shorthand" for ``list.extend``::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    >>> a_list = []
 | 
						|
    >>> a_list += [1]
 | 
						|
    >>> a_list
 | 
						|
    [1]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This is equivalent to::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
    >>> result = a_list.__iadd__([1])
 | 
						|
    >>> a_list = result
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The object pointed to by a_list has been mutated, and the pointer to the
 | 
						|
mutated object is assigned back to ``a_list``.  The end result of the
 | 
						|
assignment is a no-op, since it is a pointer to the same object that ``a_list``
 | 
						|
was previously pointing to, but the assignment still happens.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Thus, in our tuple example what is happening is equivalent to::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> result = a_tuple[0].__iadd__(['item'])
 | 
						|
   >>> a_tuple[0] = result
 | 
						|
   Traceback (most recent call last):
 | 
						|
     ...
 | 
						|
   TypeError: 'tuple' object does not support item assignment
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The ``__iadd__`` succeeds, and thus the list is extended, but even though
 | 
						|
``result`` points to the same object that ``a_tuple[0]`` already points to,
 | 
						|
that final assignment still results in an error, because tuples are immutable.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Dictionaries
 | 
						|
============
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
How can I get a dictionary to store and display its keys in a consistent order?
 | 
						|
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Use :class:`collections.OrderedDict`.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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]
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
For versions prior to 3.0, 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 an iterator 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 = sorted(pairs)
 | 
						|
   >>> pairs
 | 
						|
   [("I'm", 'else'), ('by', 'sort'), ('sorting', 'to'), ('what', 'something')]
 | 
						|
   >>> 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, 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?
 | 
						|
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Use the built-in :func:`super` function::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   class Derived(Base):
 | 
						|
       def meth (self):
 | 
						|
           super(Derived, self).meth()
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
For version prior to 3.0, you may be 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?
 | 
						|
-----------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Both static data and static methods (in the sense of C++ or Java) are supported
 | 
						|
in Python.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 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::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   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!).
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
.. XXX relevant for Python 3?
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   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.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Why does the result of ``id()`` appear to be not unique?
 | 
						|
--------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The :func:`id` builtin returns an integer that is guaranteed to be unique during
 | 
						|
the lifetime of the object.  Since in CPython, this is the object's memory
 | 
						|
address, it happens frequently that after an object is deleted from memory, the
 | 
						|
next freshly created object is allocated at the same position in memory.  This
 | 
						|
is illustrated by this example:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
>>> id(1000)
 | 
						|
13901272
 | 
						|
>>> id(2000)
 | 
						|
13901272
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The two ids belong to different integer objects that are created before, and
 | 
						|
deleted immediately after execution of the ``id()`` call.  To be sure that
 | 
						|
objects whose id you want to examine are still alive, create another reference
 | 
						|
to the object:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
>>> a = 1000; b = 2000
 | 
						|
>>> id(a)
 | 
						|
13901272
 | 
						|
>>> id(b)
 | 
						|
13891296
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Modules
 | 
						|
=======
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
How do I create a .pyc file?
 | 
						|
----------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
When a module is imported for the first time (or when the source file has
 | 
						|
changed since the current compiled file was created) a ``.pyc`` file containing
 | 
						|
the compiled code should be created in a ``__pycache__`` subdirectory of the
 | 
						|
directory containing the ``.py`` file.  The ``.pyc`` file will have a
 | 
						|
filename that starts with the same name as the ``.py`` file, and ends with
 | 
						|
``.pyc``, with a middle component that depends on the particular ``python``
 | 
						|
binary that created it.  (See :pep:`3147` for details.)
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
One reason that a ``.pyc`` file may not be created is a permissions problem
 | 
						|
with the directory containing the source file, meaning that the ``__pycache__``
 | 
						|
subdirectory cannot be created. 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.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Unless the :envvar:`PYTHONDONTWRITEBYTECODE` environment variable is set,
 | 
						|
creation of a .pyc file is automatic if you're importing a module and Python
 | 
						|
has the ability (permissions, free space, etc...) to create a ``__pycache__``
 | 
						|
subdirectory and write the compiled module to that subdirectory.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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
 | 
						|
``foo.py`` that imports another module ``xyz.py``, when you run ``foo`` (by
 | 
						|
typing ``python foo.py`` as a shell command), a ``.pyc`` will be created for
 | 
						|
``xyz`` because ``xyz`` is imported, but no ``.pyc`` file will be created for
 | 
						|
``foo`` since ``foo.py`` isn't being imported.
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
If you need to create a ``.pyc`` file for ``foo`` -- 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('foo.py')                 # doctest: +SKIP
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
This will write the ``.pyc`` to a ``__pycache__`` subdirectory in the same
 | 
						|
location as ``foo.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?
 | 
						|
---------------------------------------------------------
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
Consider using the convenience function :func:`~importlib.import_module` from
 | 
						|
:mod:`importlib` instead::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   z = importlib.import_module('x.y.z')
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
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 re-reading of a
 | 
						|
changed module, do this::
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   import importlib
 | 
						|
   import modname
 | 
						|
   importlib.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 importlib
 | 
						|
   >>> import cls
 | 
						|
   >>> c = cls.C()                # Create an instance of C
 | 
						|
   >>> importlib.reload(cls)
 | 
						|
   <module 'cls' from 'cls.py'>
 | 
						|
   >>> isinstance(c, cls.C)       # isinstance is false?!?
 | 
						|
   False
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
The nature of the problem is made clear if you print out the "identity" of the
 | 
						|
class objects:
 | 
						|
 | 
						|
   >>> hex(id(c.__class__))
 | 
						|
   '0x7352a0'
 | 
						|
   >>> hex(id(cls.C))
 | 
						|
   '0x4198d0'
 |