CODEWITHSUNDEEP
pythoncircular-reference
jeremie bergeron
jeremie bergeron

Reputation: 527

How can I resolve circular references between two class in Python?

I have 2 python class that depend on each other (a circular dependency)

  1. The class FontFile can contain multiple FontFace (1 to n).
  2. The class FontFace contain 1 FontFile.

Should I refactor the code so there isn't a circular reference between my 2 classes? If so, how? I don't see how I could do it.

Note: The FontFaceList ensures that the attribute font_file of the class FontFace is always correctly set.

from __future__ import annotations
from .factory_font_face import FactoryFontFace
from os import PathLike
from os.path import realpath
from time import time
from typing import Iterable, TYPE_CHECKING

if TYPE_CHECKING:
    from .font_face import FontFace


class FontFaceList(list):
    def __init__(self: FontFaceList, font_file: FontFile, font_faces: Iterable[FontFace]):
        self.font_file = font_file
        for font_face in font_faces:
            if not isinstance(font_face, FontFace):
                raise TypeError(f"The value is not of type {FontFace}")

            font_face.font_file = self.font_file
        super().__init__(font_faces)


    def append(self: FontFaceList, value: FontFace):
        if not isinstance(value, FontFace):
            raise TypeError(f"The value is not of type {FontFace}")

        value.font_file = self.font_file
        super().append(value)

    def extend(self: FontFaceList, iterable):
        for font_face in iterable:
            if not isinstance(font_face, FontFace):
                raise TypeError(f"The value is not of type {FontFace}")
            font_face.font_file = self.font_file
        super().extend(iterable)

    def insert(self: FontFaceList, i, value: FontFace):
        if not isinstance(value, FontFace):
            raise TypeError(f"The value is not of type {FontFace}")

        value.font_file = self.font_file
        super().insert(i, value)


class FontFile:

    def __init__(
        self: FontFile,
        filename: PathLike[str],
        font_faces: Iterable[FontFace],
        last_loaded_time: float = time()
    ) -> FontFile:
        self.filename = realpath(filename)
        self.font_faces = FontFaceList(self, font_faces)
        self.last_loaded_time = last_loaded_time


    @classmethod
    def from_font_path(cls: FontFile, filename: PathLike[str]) -> FontFile:
        font_faces = FactoryFontFace.from_font_path(filename)
        return cls(filename, font_faces)

from __future__ import annotations

from .name import Name
from typing import List, Optional, TYPE_CHECKING

if TYPE_CHECKING:
    from .font_file import FontFile

class FontFace():

    def __init__(
        self: FontFace,
        font_index: int,
        family_names: List[Name],
        exact_names: List[Name],
        weight: int,
        is_italic: bool,
        is_glyph_emboldened: bool,
        font_type: FontType,
        font_file: Optional[FontFile] = None,
    ) -> FontFace:
        self.font_index = font_index
        self.family_names = family_names
        self.exact_names = exact_names
        self.weight = weight
        self.is_italic = is_italic
        self.is_glyph_emboldened = is_glyph_emboldened
        self.font_type = font_type
        self.font_file = font_file

Upvotes: 1

Views: 97

Answers (1)

Silvio Mayolo
Silvio Mayolo

Reputation: 70357

There is no circular dependency here. FontFace only references FontFile in type annotations, which you've already correctly hidden behind if TYPE_CHECKING and from __future__ import annotations. FontFile, in turn, references FontFace in type annotations and isinstance checks, which does make FontFile depend directly on FontFace. But it's not circular since the reverse dependency is not in play at runtime.

That being said, I think your runtime checks are being perhaps a bit too defensive. You've already got type annotations ensuring that the iterable contains only FontFaces. If you're not running a type checker, then those annotations are a waste of space. If you are running a type checker, then you should trust those annotations and don't need the runtime checks.

And on top of that, even if you didn't have the annotations, it's sort of contrary to Python zen to artificially require "my class only works with the concrete class FontFace". Python is a big proponent of duck typing, so if I have a class that looks a lot like a FontFace (read: has a mutable font_file slot on it), then why shouldn't it work with your FontFile class?

So while there isn't a circular dependency at runtime, as far as the Python interpreter is concerned, I still think there are improvements to be made here. You're artificially coupling the two classes in ways that, at least from the minimal example I see here, are unnecessary. Consider the two classes in isolation and ask the questions:

  • What is the minimal API required of a face-like object I would want to store on a FontFile?
  • What is the minimal API required of the owner of a FontFace?

Maybe the resulting interfaces will surprise you with their simplicity. And if you come out the other side thinking "These two classes truly do directly depend on each other, and I refuse to let anyone else substitute their own class for one part", then perhaps they should be in one module. If they truly are that tightly coupled by design, and that's the best way to do it in your use case, then they should probably be living in one file right next to each other.

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions