问题
Can anyone amend namedtuple or provide an alternative class so that it works for mutable objects?
Primarily for readability, I would like something similar to namedtuple that does this:
from Camelot import namedgroup
Point = namedgroup('Point', ['x', 'y'])
p = Point(0, 0)
p.x = 10
>>> p
Point(x=10, y=0)
>>> p.x *= 10
Point(x=100, y=0)
It must be possible to pickle the resulting object. And per the characteristics of named tuple, the ordering of the output when represented must match the order of the parameter list when constructing the object.
回答1:
There is a mutable alternative to collections.namedtuple - recordclass.
It has the same API and memory footprint as namedtuple and it supports assignments (It should be faster as well). For example:
from recordclass import recordclass
Point = recordclass('Point', 'x y')
>>> p = Point(1, 2)
>>> p
Point(x=1, y=2)
>>> print(p.x, p.y)
1 2
>>> p.x += 2; p.y += 3; print(p)
Point(x=3, y=5)
For python 3.6 and higher recordclass (since 0.5) support typehints:
from recordclass import recordclass, RecordClass
class Point(RecordClass):
x: int
y: int
>>> Point.__annotations__
{'x':int, 'y':int}
>>> p = Point(1, 2)
>>> p
Point(x=1, y=2)
>>> print(p.x, p.y)
1 2
>>> p.x += 2; p.y += 3; print(p)
Point(x=3, y=5)
There is a more complete example (it also includes performance comparisons).
Since 0.9 recordclass library provides another variant -- recordclass.structclass factory function. It can produce classes, whose instances occupy less memory than __slots__-based instances. This is can be important for the instances with attribute values, which has not intended to have reference cycles. It may help reduce memory usage if you need to create millions of instances. Here is an illustrative example.
回答2:
types.SimpleNamespace was introduced in Python 3.3 and supports the requested requirements.
from types import SimpleNamespace
t = SimpleNamespace(foo='bar')
t.ham = 'spam'
print(t)
namespace(foo='bar', ham='spam')
print(t.foo)
'bar'
import pickle
with open('/tmp/pickle', 'wb') as f:
pickle.dump(t, f)
回答3:
It seems like the answer to this question is no.
Below is pretty close, but it's not technically mutable. This is creating a new namedtuple() instance with an updated x value:
Point = namedtuple('Point', ['x', 'y'])
p = Point(0, 0)
p = p._replace(x=10)
On the other hand, you can create a simple class using __slots__ that should work well for frequently updating class instance attributes:
class Point:
__slots__ = ['x', 'y']
def __init__(self, x, y):
self.x = x
self.y = y
To add to this answer, I think __slots__ is good use here because it's memory efficient when you create lots of class instances. The only downside is that you can't create new class attributes.
Here's one relevant thread that illustrates the memory efficiency - Dictionary vs Object - which is more efficient and why?
The quoted content in the answer of this thread is a very succinct explanation why __slots__ is more memory efficient - Python slots
回答4:
The latest namedlist 1.7 passes all of your tests with both Python 2.7 and Python 3.5 as of Jan 11, 2016. It is a pure python implementation whereas the recordclass is a C extension. Of course, it depends on your requirements whether a C extension is preferred or not.
Your tests (but also see the note below):
from __future__ import print_function
import pickle
import sys
from namedlist import namedlist
Point = namedlist('Point', 'x y')
p = Point(x=1, y=2)
print('1. Mutation of field values')
p.x *= 10
p.y += 10
print('p: {}, {}\n'.format(p.x, p.y))
print('2. String')
print('p: {}\n'.format(p))
print('3. Representation')
print(repr(p), '\n')
print('4. Sizeof')
print('size of p:', sys.getsizeof(p), '\n')
print('5. Access by name of field')
print('p: {}, {}\n'.format(p.x, p.y))
print('6. Access by index')
print('p: {}, {}\n'.format(p[0], p[1]))
print('7. Iterative unpacking')
x, y = p
print('p: {}, {}\n'.format(x, y))
print('8. Iteration')
print('p: {}\n'.format([v for v in p]))
print('9. Ordered Dict')
print('p: {}\n'.format(p._asdict()))
print('10. Inplace replacement (update?)')
p._update(x=100, y=200)
print('p: {}\n'.format(p))
print('11. Pickle and Unpickle')
pickled = pickle.dumps(p)
unpickled = pickle.loads(pickled)
assert p == unpickled
print('Pickled successfully\n')
print('12. Fields\n')
print('p: {}\n'.format(p._fields))
print('13. Slots')
print('p: {}\n'.format(p.__slots__))
Output on Python 2.7
1. Mutation of field values
p: 10, 12
2. String
p: Point(x=10, y=12)
3. Representation
Point(x=10, y=12)
4. Sizeof
size of p: 64
5. Access by name of field
p: 10, 12
6. Access by index
p: 10, 12
7. Iterative unpacking
p: 10, 12
8. Iteration
p: [10, 12]
9. Ordered Dict
p: OrderedDict([('x', 10), ('y', 12)])
10. Inplace replacement (update?)
p: Point(x=100, y=200)
11. Pickle and Unpickle
Pickled successfully
12. Fields
p: ('x', 'y')
13. Slots
p: ('x', 'y')
The only difference with Python 3.5 is that the namedlist has become smaller, the size is 56 (Python 2.7 reports 64).
Note that I have changed your test 10 for in-place replacement. The namedlist has a _replace() method which does a shallow copy, and that makes perfect sense to me because the namedtuple in the standard library behaves the same way. Changing the semantics of the _replace() method would be confusing. In my opinion the _update() method should be used for in-place updates. Or maybe I failed to understand the intent of your test 10?
回答5:
As a very Pythonic alternative for this task, since Python-3.7, you can use
dataclasses module that not only behaves like a mutable NamedTuple because they use normal class definitions they also support other classes features.
From PEP-0557:
Although they use a very different mechanism, Data Classes can be thought of as "mutable namedtuples with defaults". Because Data Classes use normal class definition syntax, you are free to use inheritance, metaclasses, docstrings, user-defined methods, class factories, and other Python class features.
A class decorator is provided which inspects a class definition for variables with type annotations as defined in PEP 526, "Syntax for Variable Annotations". In this document, such variables are called fields. Using these fields, the decorator adds generated method definitions to the class to support instance initialization, a repr, comparison methods, and optionally other methods as described in the Specification section. Such a class is called a Data Class, but there's really nothing special about the class: the decorator adds generated methods to the class and returns the same class it was given.
This feature is introduced in PEP-0557 that you can read about it in more details on provided documentation link.
Example:
In [20]: from dataclasses import dataclass
In [21]: @dataclass
...: class InventoryItem:
...: '''Class for keeping track of an item in inventory.'''
...: name: str
...: unit_price: float
...: quantity_on_hand: int = 0
...:
...: def total_cost(self) -> float:
...: return self.unit_price * self.quantity_on_hand
...:
Demo:
In [23]: II = InventoryItem('bisc', 2000)
In [24]: II
Out[24]: InventoryItem(name='bisc', unit_price=2000, quantity_on_hand=0)
In [25]: II.name = 'choco'
In [26]: II.name
Out[26]: 'choco'
In [27]:
In [27]: II.unit_price *= 3
In [28]: II.unit_price
Out[28]: 6000
In [29]: II
Out[29]: InventoryItem(name='choco', unit_price=6000, quantity_on_hand=0)
回答6:
The following is a good solution for Python 3: A minimal class using __slots__ and Sequence abstract base class; does not do fancy error detection or such, but it works, and behaves mostly like a mutable tuple (except for typecheck).
from collections import Sequence
class NamedMutableSequence(Sequence):
__slots__ = ()
def __init__(self, *a, **kw):
slots = self.__slots__
for k in slots:
setattr(self, k, kw.get(k))
if a:
for k, v in zip(slots, a):
setattr(self, k, v)
def __str__(self):
clsname = self.__class__.__name__
values = ', '.join('%s=%r' % (k, getattr(self, k))
for k in self.__slots__)
return '%s(%s)' % (clsname, values)
__repr__ = __str__
def __getitem__(self, item):
return getattr(self, self.__slots__[item])
def __setitem__(self, item, value):
return setattr(self, self.__slots__[item], value)
def __len__(self):
return len(self.__slots__)
class Point(NamedMutableSequence):
__slots__ = ('x', 'y')
Example:
>>> p = Point(0, 0)
>>> p.x = 10
>>> p
Point(x=10, y=0)
>>> p.x *= 10
>>> p
Point(x=100, y=0)
If you want, you can have a method to create the class too (though using an explicit class is more transparent):
def namedgroup(name, members):
if isinstance(members, str):
members = members.split()
members = tuple(members)
return type(name, (NamedMutableSequence,), {'__slots__': members})
Example:
>>> Point = namedgroup('Point', ['x', 'y'])
>>> Point(6, 42)
Point(x=6, y=42)
In Python 2 you need to adjust it slightly - if you inherit from Sequence, the class will have a __dict__ and the __slots__ will stop from working.
The solution in Python 2 is to not inherit from Sequence, but object. If isinstance(Point, Sequence) == True is desired, you need to register the NamedMutableSequence as a base class to Sequence:
Sequence.register(NamedMutableSequence)
回答7:
Let's implement this with dynamic type creation:
import copy
def namedgroup(typename, fieldnames):
def init(self, **kwargs):
attrs = {k: None for k in self._attrs_}
for k in kwargs:
if k in self._attrs_:
attrs[k] = kwargs[k]
else:
raise AttributeError('Invalid Field')
self.__dict__.update(attrs)
def getattribute(self, attr):
if attr.startswith("_") or attr in self._attrs_:
return object.__getattribute__(self, attr)
else:
raise AttributeError('Invalid Field')
def setattr(self, attr, value):
if attr in self._attrs_:
object.__setattr__(self, attr, value)
else:
raise AttributeError('Invalid Field')
def rep(self):
d = ["{}={}".format(v,self.__dict__[v]) for v in self._attrs_]
return self._typename_ + '(' + ', '.join(d) + ')'
def iterate(self):
for x in self._attrs_:
yield self.__dict__[x]
raise StopIteration()
def setitem(self, *args, **kwargs):
return self.__dict__.__setitem__(*args, **kwargs)
def getitem(self, *args, **kwargs):
return self.__dict__.__getitem__(*args, **kwargs)
attrs = {"__init__": init,
"__setattr__": setattr,
"__getattribute__": getattribute,
"_attrs_": copy.deepcopy(fieldnames),
"_typename_": str(typename),
"__str__": rep,
"__repr__": rep,
"__len__": lambda self: len(fieldnames),
"__iter__": iterate,
"__setitem__": setitem,
"__getitem__": getitem,
}
return type(typename, (object,), attrs)
This checks the attributes to see if they are valid before allowing the operation to continue.
So is this pickleable? Yes if (and only if) you do the following:
>>> import pickle
>>> Point = namedgroup("Point", ["x", "y"])
>>> p = Point(x=100, y=200)
>>> p2 = pickle.loads(pickle.dumps(p))
>>> p2.x
100
>>> p2.y
200
>>> id(p) != id(p2)
True
The definition has to be in your namespace, and must exist long enough for pickle to find it. So if you define this to be in your package, it should work.
Point = namedgroup("Point", ["x", "y"])
Pickle will fail if you do the following, or make the definition temporary (goes out of scope when the function ends, say):
some_point = namedgroup("Point", ["x", "y"])
And yes, it does preserve the order of the fields listed in the type creation.
回答8:
If you want similar behavior as namedtuples but mutable try namedlist
Note that in order to be mutable it cannot be a tuple.
回答9:
Tuples are by definition immutable.
You can however make a dictionary subclass where you can access the attributes with dot-notation;
In [1]: %cpaste
Pasting code; enter '--' alone on the line to stop or use Ctrl-D.
:class AttrDict(dict):
:
: def __getattr__(self, name):
: return self[name]
:
: def __setattr__(self, name, value):
: self[name] = value
:--
In [2]: test = AttrDict()
In [3]: test.a = 1
In [4]: test.b = True
In [5]: test
Out[5]: {'a': 1, 'b': True}
回答10:
Provided performance is of little importance, one could use a silly hack like:
from collection import namedtuple
Point = namedtuple('Point', 'x y z')
mutable_z = Point(1,2,[3])
来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/29290359/existence-of-mutable-named-tuple-in-python