Reputation: 2556
I'm trying to do something along these lines:
class A:
def __init__( self, x=None, y=None ):
self.x = x
self.y = y
class B( A ):
def do_something_in_Bs_context( self ):
print "In B"
class C( A ):
def do_something_in_Cs_context( self ):
print "In C"
a = A(1,2)
b = B.do_something_in_Bs_context( a )
c = C.do_something_in_Cs_context( a )
As expected this code will generate this error:
TypeError: unbound method do_something_in_Bs_context() must be called with B instance as first argument (got A instance instead)
The underlying reason for this design is that A is a container of data ( say a table ) and B and C are a set of operations on A. Both B and C operate on the same data but are conceptually a distinct set of operations that can be performed on the same data. I could club all the operations in B and C inside A, but I want to create the separation in concepts. (As an example, on a table, I can perform different sets of operations which may be grouped into say Calculus or Trignometry. So A:Table, B: Calculus, C:Trignometry)
This reminded me of the Model-View-Controller paradigm with a slight twist.
I came up with the following solutions:
I don't like either of these solutions much (2 slightly better than 1), but then I'm not sure if there is a better/cleaner/more pythonic way to solve this problem is. Any pointers?
Upvotes: 4
Views: 210
Reputation: 18218
Move state in an additional class and make an instance of it an attribute of A:
class State(object):
def __init__( self, x=None, y=None ):
self.x = x
self.y = y
class A(object):
def __init__( self, state=None ):
self.state = state
class B( A ):
def __init__( self, state=None ):
super(B, self).__init__(state)
def do_something_in_Bs_context( self ):
print self.state.x
class C( A ):
def __init__( self, state=None ):
super(C, self).__init__(state)
def do_something_in_Cs_context( self ):
print self.state.y
s = State(1, 2)
b = B(s)
c = C(s)
b.do_something_in_Bs_context()
c.do_something_in_Cs_context()
Upvotes: 1
Reputation: 49085
Here's how I understand the question: B
and C
are collections of functions that consume data of type A
. What you want to do is group the functions logically.
I'd suggest doing one of the following:
B
and C
that operate on A
's -- this is a HAS-A relationship. The functions/methods could be static, if that's what you need B
and C
, creating top-level function definitionsI think inheritance would be a bad solution to this problem. I don't think there's an IS-A relationship.
Upvotes: 6