|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Python Programming Language
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Good idea to use a class as function with __new__?
Hi, I am implementing som code generation and want to to use some variant of the template method pattern. What I came up with is to have a class with the common part in a method and the subclasses can then override the Customize methods to do their own special part. Now to the question I use the __new__ to return the result instead of the instance. So that the class is used as an function. So insted of having. a = Template() result = a.__TemplateMethod(preifix="foo") I can write: result = Template(prefix="foo") class Template(object): def __init__(cls, *args, **kwds): pass def __new__(cls, *args, **kwds): obj = super(Template, cls).__new__(cls, *args, **kwds) return obj.__TemplateMethod(*args, **kwds) def Customize1(self, prefix="hello", *args, **kwds): return prefix+"1\n" def Customize2(self, prefix="hello", *args, **kwds): return prefix+"2\n" def __TemplateMethod(self, *args, **kwds): result = "" result += self.Customize1(*args, **kwds) result += self.Customize1(*args, **kwds) return result b = Template("foo") print b
En Mon, 28 May 2007 09:17:30 -0300, glomde <tbr@yahoo.com> escribi: > I am implementing som code generation and want to to use some variant > of the template method pattern. > What I came up with is to have a class with the common part > in a method and the subclasses can then override the Customize methods > to do their own special part. > Now to the question I use the __new__ to return the result instead > of the instance. So that the class is used as an function.
It works, and I don't see any big problems, but I don't *like* that. I'd use __call__ instead; that is, write __new__ and __init__ normally -if you need them at all- and move the magic to __call__: def __call__(self, *args, **kwds): return self.__TemplateMethod(*args, **kwds) x = Template()(prefix="foo") or perhaps: x = Template(prefix="foo")() I think the extra () improves readability - it's clear that x comes from a function call, it's not a Template instance as one would expect from your original code. And depending on the application, you could keep the instances and call them with different arguments - with the original code you always create a new instance just to discard it immediately. -- Gabriel Genellina
Gabriel Genellina wrote: > def __call__(self, *args, **kwds): > return self.__TemplateMethod(*args, **kwds) > x = Template()(prefix="foo") > or perhaps: > x = Template(prefix="foo")() > I think the extra () improves readability - it's clear that x comes from a > function call, it's not a Template instance as one would expect from your > original code. > And depending on the application, you could keep the instances and call > them with different arguments - with the original code you always create a > new instance just to discard it immediately. > --
Thanks for the reply. I was considering __call__ but in my case it is really something that will be discarded immediately. And right now it is is implemented as function where I have arguments to send in which customize functions something like: def Template(self, func1=Customize1, func2= Customize2, *args, **kwds): func1(*args, **kwds) func2(*args, **kwds) So I just wanted to organize it a little bit nicer and be able to subclass instead of sending in function pointers. But that had the same interface. But you are right the extra () does make it clearer, so I probably go for that. Cheers, /T
> Gabriel Genellina
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|