[Python-Dev] PEP 520: Preserving Class Attribute Definition Order (round 5) (original) (raw)
Eric Snow ericsnowcurrently at gmail.com
Fri Jun 24 17:52:51 EDT 2016
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] unittest.TestResult lacks API to separate subtests
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 520: Preserving Class Attribute Definition Order (round 5)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
- a clearer motivation section
- include "dunder" names
- 2 open questions (slots? drop read-only requirement?)
-eric
PEP: 520 Title: Preserving Class Attribute Definition Order 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, 11-Jun-2016, 20-Jun-2016, 24-Jun-2016
Abstract
The class definition syntax is ordered by its very nature. Class attributes defined there are thus ordered. Aside from helping with readability, that ordering is sometimes significant. If it were automatically available outside the class definition then the attribute order could be used without the need for extra boilerplate (such as metaclasses or manually enumerating the attribute order). Given that this information already exists, access to the definition order of attributes is a reasonable expectation. However, currently Python does not preserve the attribute order from the class definition.
This PEP changes that by preserving the order in which attributes
are introduced in the class definition body. That order will now be
preserved in the __definition_order__
attribute of the class.
This allows introspection of the original definition order, e.g. by
class decorators.
Additionally, this PEP changes the default class definition namespace
to OrderedDict
. The long-lived class namespace (__dict__
) will
remain a dict
.
Motivation
The attribute order from a class definition may be useful to tools that rely on name order. However, without the automatic availability of the definition order, those tools must impose extra requirements on users. For example, use of such a tool may require that your class use a particular metaclass. Such requirements are often enough to discourage use of the tool.
Some tools that could make use of this PEP include:
- documentation generators
- testing frameworks
- CLI frameworks
- web frameworks
- config generators
- data serializers
- enum factories (my original motivation)
Background
When a class is defined using a class
statement, the class body
is executed within a namespace. Currently that namespace defaults to
dict
. If the metaclass defines __prepare__()
then the result
of calling it is used for the class definition namespace.
After the execution completes, the definition namespace namespace is
copied into new dict
. Then the original definition namespace is
discarded. The new copy is stored away as the class's namespace and
is exposed as __dict__
through a read-only proxy.
The class attribute definition order is represented by the insertion
order of names in the definition namespace. Thus, we can have
access to the definition order by switching the definition namespace
to an ordered mapping, such as collections.OrderedDict
. This is
feasible using a metaclass and __prepare__
, as described above.
In fact, exactly this is by far the most common use case for using
__prepare__
(see PEP 487).
At that point, the only missing thing for later access to the definition order is storing it on the class before the definition namespace is thrown away. Again, this may be done using a metaclass. However, this means that the definition order is preserved only for classes that use such a metaclass. There are two practical problems with that:
First, it requires the use of 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. PEP 422 and PEP 487 discuss this at
length. 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
.
Second, only classes that opt in to using the OrderedDict
-based
metaclass will have access to the definition order. This is problematic
for cases where universal access to the definition order is important.
Specification
Part 1:
all classes have a
__definition_order__
attribute__definition_order__
is atuple
of identifiers (orNone
)__definition_order__
is a read-only attribute__definition_order__
is always set:- during execution of the class body, the insertion order of names into the class definition namespace is stored in a tuple
- if
__definition_order__
is defined in the class body then it must be atuple
of identifiers orNone
; any other value will result inTypeError
- classes that do not have a class definition (e.g. builtins) have
their
__definition_order__
set toNone
- classes for which `__prepare__()
returned something other than
OrderedDict(or a subclass) have their
__definition_order__set to
None`` (except where #2 applies)
Part 2:
- the default class definition namespace is now
OrderdDict
The following code demonstrates roughly equivalent semantics for the default behavior::
class Meta(type): @classmethod def prepare(cls, *args, **kwargs): return OrderedDict()
class Spam(metaclass=Meta): ham = None eggs = 5 definition_order = tuple(locals())
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 the ability to set __definition_order__
manually allows
a dynamically created class (e.g. Cython, type()
) to still have
__definition_order__
properly set.
Why not "attribute_order"?
__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 feature focused on more than
class definition.
Why not 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 nearly everyone they would only
be clutter, causing the same extra work for everyone.
However, dropping dunder names by default may inadvertantly cause problems for classes that use dunder names unconventionally. In this case it's better to play it safe and preserve all the names from the class definition.
Note that a couple of dunder names (__name__
and __qualname__
)
are injected by default by the compiler. So they will be included even
though they are not strictly part of the class definition body.
Why None instead of an empty tuple?
A key objective of adding __definition_order__
is to preserve
information in class definitions which was lost prior to this PEP.
One consequence is that __definition_order__
implies an original
class definition. Using None
allows us to clearly distinquish
classes that do not have a definition order. An empty tuple clearly
indicates a class that came from a definition statement but did not
define any attributes there.
Why None instead of not setting the attribute?
The absence of an attribute requires more complex handling than None
does for consumers of __definition_order__
.
Why constrain manually set values?
If __definition_order__
is manually set in the class body then it
will be used. We require it to be a tuple of identifiers (or None
)
so that consumers of __definition_order__
may have a consistent
expectation for the value. That helps maximize the feature's
usefulness.
We could also also allow an arbitrary iterable for a manually set
__definition_order__
and convert it into a tuple. However, not
all iterables infer a definition order (e.g. set
). So we opt in
favor of requiring a tuple.
Why is definition_order even necessary?
Since the definition order is not preserved in __dict__
, it is
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.
Support for C-API Types
Arguably, most C-defined Python types (e.g. built-in, extension modules)
have a roughly equivalent concept of a definition order. So conceivably
__definition_order__
could be set for such types automatically. This
PEP does not introduce any such support. However, it does not prohibit
it either.
The specific cases:
- builtin types
- PyType_Ready
- PyType_FromSpec
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 since issubclass(OrderedDict, dict)
is
true.
Changes
In addition to the class syntax, the following expose the new behavior:
- builtins.build_class
- types.prepare_class
- types.new_class
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__to
None``.
Open Questions
What about
__slots__
?Drop the "read-only attribute" requirement?
Per Guido:
I don't see why it needs to be a read-only attribute. There are
very few of those -- in general we let users play around with
things unless we have a hard reason to restrict assignment (e.g.
the interpreter's internal state could be compromised). I don't
see such a hard reason here.
Implementation
The implementation is found in the tracker. [impl_]
Alternatives
An Order-preserving cls.dict
Instead of storing the definition order in __definition_order__
,
the now-ordered definition namespace could be copied into a new
OrderedDict
. This would then be used as the mapping proxied as
__dict__
. Doing so would mostly provide the same semantics.
However, using OrderedDict
for __dict__
would obscure the
relationship with the definition namespace, making it less useful.
Additionally, (in the case of OrderedDict
specifically) doing
this would require significant changes to the semantics of the
concrete dict
C-API.
There has been some discussion about moving to a compact dict
implementation which would (mostly) preserve insertion order. However
the lack of an explicit __definition_order__
would still remain
as a pain point.
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.
A stdlib Metaclass that Implements prepare() with OrderedDict
This has all the same problems as writing your own metaclass. The only advantage is that you don't have to actually write this metaclass. So it doesn't offer any benefit in the context of this PEP.
Set definition_order at Compile-time
Each class's __qualname__
is determined at compile-time.
This same concept could be applied to __definition_order__
.
The result of composing __definition_order__
at compile-time
would be nearly the same as doing so at run-time.
Comparative implementation difficulty aside, the key difference
would be that at compile-time it would not be practical to
preserve definition order for attributes that are set dynamically
in the class body (e.g. locals()[name] = value
). However,
they should still be reflected in the definition order. One
posible resolution would be to require class authors to manually
set __definition_order__
if they define any class attributes
dynamically.
Ultimately, the use of OrderedDict
at run-time or compile-time
discovery is almost entirely an implementation detail.
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.
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] unittest.TestResult lacks API to separate subtests
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] PEP 520: Preserving Class Attribute Definition Order (round 5)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]