3

I have the following scenario:

I have abstract classes A and B, and A uses B to perform some tasks. In both classes, there are some "constant" parameters (right now implemented as class attributes) to be set by concrete classes extending those abstract classes, and some of the parameters are shared (they should have the same value in a derived "suite" of classes SubA and SubB).

The problem I face here is with how namespaces are organized in Python. The ideal solution if Python had dynamic scoping would be to declare those parameters as module variables, and then when creating a new suite of extending classes I could just overwrite them in their new module. But (luckily, because for most cases that is safer and more convenient) Python does not work like that.

To put it in a more concrete context (not my actual problem, and of course not accurate nor realistic), imagine something like a nbody simulator with:

 ATTRACTION_CONSTANT = NotImplemented # could be G or a Ke for example

 class NbodyGroup(object):
     def __init__(self):
         self.bodies = []

     def step(self):
         for a in self.bodies:
             for b in self.bodies:
                 f = ATTRACTION_CONSTANT * a.var * b.var / distance(a, b)**2
                 ...

 class Body(object):
     def calculate_field_at_surface(self):
         return ATTRACTION_CONSTANT * self.var / self.r**2

Then other module could implement a PlanetarySystem(NBodyGroup) and Planet(Body) setting ATTRACTION_CONSTANT to 6.67384E-11 and other module could implement MolecularAggregate(NBodyGroup) and Particle(Body) and set ATTRACTION_CONSTANT to 8.987E9.

In brief: what are good alternatives to emulate global constants at module level that can be "overwritten" in derived modules (modules that implement the abstract classes defined in the first module)?

Improve this question
1
  • Could you be more precise about your actual problem? What is the issue with putting one global ATTRACTION_CONSTANT definition in the module containing the derived classes and "overwriting" the value in the two subclasses with this global variable? Commented Dec 8, 2011 at 13:05

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
1

How about using a mixin? You could define (based on your example) classes for PlanetarySystemConstants and MolecularAggregateConstants that hold the ATTRACTION_CONSTANT and then use class PlanetarySystem(NBodyGroup, PlanetarySystemConstants) and class MolecularAggregate(NBodyGroup, MolecularAggregateConstants) to define those classes.

Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

2 Comments

+1 so far this is the only answer that improves the current situation, but I'd prefer to stay away from mixings (multiple inheritance is evil!)
Heh. I'd have to disagree. I'd say it more like: "multiple inheritance can be evil". If there's a specific, narrow reason that you're using them, they serve a purpose.
1

Here are a few things I could suggest:

  1. Link each body to its group, so that the body accesses the constant from the group when it calculates its force. For example:

    class NbodyGroup(object):
    def __init__(self, constant):
        self.bodies = []
        self.constant = constant

    def step(self):
        for a in self.bodies:
            for b in self.bodies:
                f = self.constant * a.var * b.var / distance(a, b)**2
                ...

class Body(object):
    def __init__(self, group):
        self.group = group
    def calculate_field_at_surface(self):
        return self.group.constant * self.var / self.r**2

    Pro: this automatically enforces the fact that bodies in the same group should exert the same kind of force. Con: semantically, you could argue that a body should exist independent of any groups in may be in.

  2. Add a parameter to specify the type of force. This could be a value of an enumeration, for example.

    class Force(object):
    def __init__(self, constant):
        self.constant = constant
GRAVITY = Force(6.67e-11)
ELECTRIC = Force(8.99e9)

class NbodyGroup(object):
    def __init__(self, force):
        self.bodies = []
        self.force = force

    def step(self):
        for a in self.bodies:
            for b in self.bodies:
                f = self.force.constant * a.charge(self.force) \
                      * b.charge(self.force) / distance(a, b)**2
                ...

class Body(object):
    def __init__(self, charges, r):
        # charges = {GRAVITY: mass_value, ELECTRIC: electric_charge_value}
        self.charges = charges
        ...
    def charge(self, force):
        return self.charges.get(force, 0)
    def calculate_field_at_surface(self, force):
        return force.constant * self.charge(force) / self.r**2

    Conceptually, I would prefer this method because it encapsulates the properties that you typically associate with a given object (and only those) in that object. If speed of execution is an important goal, though, this may not be the best design.

Hopefully you can translate these to your actual application.

Improve this answer

1 Comment

I would dismiss the first approach because of the cyclic references... Adding parameters is a good option, but it can get very verbose quickly :(
1

removed old version

you can try subclassing __new__ to create a metaclass. Then at the class creation, you can get the subclass module by looking in previous frames with the inspect module of python std, get your new constant here if you find one, and patch the class attribute of the derived class.

I won't post an implementation for the moment because it is non trivial for me, and kind of dangerous.

edit: added implementation

in A.py:

import inspect
MY_GLOBAL = 'base module'
class BASE(object):
    def __new__(cls, *args, **kwargs):
        clsObj = super(BASE, cls).__new__(cls, *args, **kwargs)
        clsObj.CLS_GLOBAL = inspect.stack()[-1][0].f_globals['MY_GLOBAL']
        return clsObj

in B.py:

import A
MY_GLOBAL = 'derived'
print A.BASE().CLS_GLOBAL

now you can have fun with your own scoping rules ...

Improve this answer

6 Comments

that is what I am currently doing and I don't like it, that's why I posted the question, because I want to remove duplicated constants or cross class references
no, the ATTRACTION_CONSTANT variable is defined at class level in my version. Read your question and my answer again.
read the full question text again: right now implemented as class attributes; the code in the sample scenario is what I'd like to have if Python supported dynamic scoping.
ooops indeed. Sorry for this. So your issue is that you dont wan't to have a duplicate ATTRACTION_CONSTANT definition in NbodyGroup and in PlanetarySystem?
exactly! in general, it could be understood as how to 'extend' or specialize modules as a whole...
|
0

You should use property for this case,

eg.

class NbodyGroup(object):
    @property
    def ATTRACTION_CONSTANT(self): 
        return None
    ...
    def step(self):
        for a in self.bodies:
            for b in self.bodies:
                f = self.ATTRACTION_CONSTANT * a.var * b.var / distance(a, b)**2

class PlanetarySystem(NBodyGroup):
    @property
    def ATTRACTION_CONSTANT(self): 
        return 6.67384E-11
Improve this answer

1 Comment

I don't see how this improves the current situation

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.