[Python-Dev] PEP 520: Ordered Class Definition Namespace (original) (raw)

Eric Snow ericsnowcurrently at gmail.com
Tue Jun 7 20:50:50 EDT 2016

I've grabbed a PEP # (520) and updated the PEP to clarify points that were brought up earlier today. Given positive feedback I got at PyCon and the reaction today, I'm hopeful the PEP isn't far off from pronouncement. :)

-eric

==========================================

PEP: 520 Title: Ordered Class Definition Namespace Version: RevisionRevisionRevision Last-Modified: DateDateDate Author: Eric Snow <ericsnowcurrently at gmail.com> Status: Draft Type: Standards Track Content-Type: text/x-rst Created: 7-Jun-2016 Python-Version: 3.6 Post-History: 7-Jun-2016

Abstract

This PEP changes the default class definition namespace to OrderedDict. Furthermore, the order in which the attributes are defined in each class body will now be preserved in type.__definition_order__. This allows introspection of the original definition order, e.g. by class decorators.

Note: just to be clear, this PEP is not about changing __dict__ for classes to OrderedDict.

Motivation

Currently the namespace used during execution of a class body defaults to dict. If the metaclass defines __prepare__() then the result of calling it is used. Thus, before this PEP, if you needed your class definition namespace to be OrderedDict you had to use a metaclass.

Metaclasses introduce an extra level of complexity to code and in some cases (e.g. conflicts) are a problem. So reducing the need for them is worth doing when the opportunity presents itself. Given that we now have a C implementation of OrderedDict and that OrderedDict is the common use case for __prepare__(), we have such an opportunity by defaulting to OrderedDict.

The usefulness of OrderedDict-by-default is greatly increased if the definition order is directly introspectable on classes afterward, particularly by code that is independent of the original class definition. One of the original motivating use cases for this PEP is generic class decorators that make use of the definition order.

Changing the default class definition namespace has been discussed a number of times, including on the mailing lists and in PEP 422 and PEP 487 (see the References section below).

Specification

The following code demonstrates roughly equivalent semantics::

class Meta(type): def prepare(cls, *args, **kwargs): return OrderedDict()

class Spam(metaclass=Meta): ham = None eggs = 5 definition_order = tuple(k for k in locals() if (!k.startswith('') or !k.endswith('')))

Note that [pep487_] proposes a similar solution, albeit as part of a broader proposal.

Why a tuple?

Use of a tuple reflects the fact that we are exposing the order in which attributes on the class were defined. Since the definition is already complete by the time definition_order__ is set, the content and order of the value won't be changing. Thus we use a type that communicates that state of immutability.

Why a read-only attribute?

As with the use of tuple, making __definition_order__ a read-only attribute communicates the fact that the information it represents is complete. Since it represents the state of a particular one-time event (execution of the class definition body), allowing the value to be replaced would reduce confidence that the attribute corresponds to the original class body.

If a use case for a writable (or mutable) __definition_order__ arises, the restriction may be loosened later. Presently this seems unlikely and furthermore it is usually best to go immutable-by-default.

Note that __definition_order__ is centered on the class definition body. The use cases for dealing with the class namespace (__dict__) post-definition are a separate matter. __definition_order__ would be a significantly misleading name for a supporting feature.

See [nick_concern_] for more discussion.

Why ignore "dunder" names?

Names starting and ending with "__" are reserved for use by the interpreter. In practice they should not be relevant to the users of __definition_order__. Instead, for early everyone they would only be clutter, causing the same extra work for everyone.

Why is definition_order even necessary?

Since the definition order is not preserved in __dict__, it would be lost once class definition execution completes. Classes could explicitly set the attribute as the last thing in the body. However, then independent decorators could only make use of classes that had done so. Instead, __definition_order__ preserves this one bit of info from the class body so that it is universally available.

Compatibility

This PEP does not break backward compatibility, except in the case that someone relies strictly on dict as the class definition namespace. This shouldn't be a problem.

Changes

In addition to the class syntax, the following expose the new behavior:

Other Python Implementations

Pending feedback, the impact on Python implementations is expected to be minimal. If a Python implementation cannot support switching to `OrderedDict-by-default then it can always set __definition_order__toNone``.

Implementation

The implementation is found in the tracker. [impl_]

Alternatives

type.dict as OrderedDict

Instead of storing the definition order in __definition_order__, the now-ordered definition namespace could be copied into a new OrderedDict. This would mostly provide the same semantics.

However, using OrderedDict for type,__dict__ would obscure the relationship with the definition namespace, making it less useful. Additionally, doing this would require significant changes to the semantics of the concrete dict C-API.

A "namespace" Keyword Arg for Class Definition

PEP 422 introduced a new "namespace" keyword arg to class definitions that effectively replaces the need to __prepare__(). [pep422_] However, the proposal was withdrawn in favor of the simpler PEP 487.

References

.. [impl] issue #24254 (https://bugs.python.org/issue24254)

.. [nick_concern] Nick's concerns about mutability (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2016-June/144883.html)

.. [pep422] PEP 422 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0422/#order-preserving-classes)

.. [pep487] PEP 487 (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0487/#defining-arbitrary-namespaces)

.. [orig] original discussion (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-ideas/2013-February/019690.html)

.. [followup1] follow-up 1 (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-June/127103.html)

.. [followup2] follow-up 2 (https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2015-May/140137.html)

Copyright

This document has been placed in the public domain.

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list