Questions on Instance methods

[Arup Rakshit]

Hello Dieter,


Thanks for taking time to explain this. I understood it half way, but that is my problem. I need to spend some more months to feel in home I guess. As you saw from documentation link, those are just words kind of spec. Which source you recommend to read which explains these concepts more with example codes. Otherwise, I think the list will be flooded by questions from me as there are so many things I feel like abstract. I found Python official tutorial more explanatory and not much questions came while I was reading it. But it didn’t cover everything, it explains as a tutorial does. I am reading https://docs.python.org/3/reference/index.html now, and it seems like saying what Python can do, but not going deep to explain it to a new comers most of the time.



Thanks,

Arup Rakshit
ar at zeit.io



> On 20-Apr-2019, at 10:59 AM, dieter <dieter at handshake.de> wrote:
> 
> Arup Rakshit <ar at zeit.io> writes:
> 
>>>   When an instance method object is created by retrieving a class method object from a class or instance, its __self__ attribute is the class itself, and its __func__ attribute is the function object underlying the class method.
>> 
>> Here I have 2 questions:
>> 
>> 1. How do you create an instance method object from a class method object by using either the class or the instance?
> 
> Typically, it happens automatically by accessing "instance.method".
> The "types" module contains a type which allows you to
> create instance methods manually. However, in this case,
> you decide what becomes its "__self__" and its "__function__".
> 
>> 2. Why in both cases the __self__ is set to Class only?
> 
> Because of the "class method".
> 
> The "*method" objects have the task to provide the (implicit) first
> argument to the function. For a function defined as "classmethod",
> this is the class (otherwise the instance).
> 
>> 3. Would you give me examples also while explaining this?
> 
> python3
>>>> class C:
> ...   @classmethod
> ...   def cm(cls): print(cls)
> ...   def im(self): print(self)
> ... 
>>>> C.cm
> <bound method C.cm of <class '__main__.C'>>
>>>> c=C()
>>>> c.cm
> <bound method C.cm of <class '__main__.C'>>
>>>> c.im
> <bound method C.im of <__main__.C object at 0xb785258c>>
>>>> C.cm.__self__
> <class '__main__.C'>
>>>> c.cm.__self__
> <class '__main__.C'>
>>>> c.im.__self__
> <__main__.C object at 0xb785258c>
> 
>>>  When an instance method object is derived from a class method object, the “class instance” stored in __self__ will actually be the class itself, so that calling either x.f(1) or C.f(1) is equivalent to calling f(C,1) where f is the underlying function.
> 
> I agree that the above paragraph could be improved.
> 
> It addresses the case "cm" above: you access a method
> defined as a class method (the "is derived from a class method object" above
> means "is created for the access to a class method").
> The paragraph wants to stress that even though the (bound method) attribute
> is named "__self__", it actually contains the class and not a
> (class) instance.
> 
> 
>> Here x is an instance of C. Would you give me an example to illustrate why " x.f(1) or C.f(1) is equivalent to calling f(C,1)” ?
> 
> Remember that the purpose of the "*method" objects it to automatically
> provide the first argument ("cls" or "self") to the function.
> 
> Because accessing a method automatically creates a method
> object, it is non trivial to access the "underlying function".
> One possibility is to use "__func__" on the method object.
> With this in mind we get for the above example:
> 
>>>> c.cm.__func__(C)
> <class '__main__.C'>
>>>> c.cm()
> <class '__main__.C'>
>>>> C.cm.__func__(C)
> <class '__main__.C'>
>>>> C.cm()
> <class '__main__.C'>
> 
> -- 
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list