What about stuff like literal_eval? Or even just monkeypatching with name.__dict__[param] = value ?
> It does fine grained locking. Mutable data structures like lists and dicts do their own locking. Incidentally, this is one reason why supporting C extensions would be complicated.
Would there be a succinct theoretical description of exactly how that's implemented anywhere? What about things like numpy arrays.
literal_eval could in principle be supported I think. name.__dict__[param] = value works as you'd expect:
$ make run
class A(object):
pass
a = A()
a.__dict__['foo'] = 'bar'
print a.foo
bar
Also, NumPy is implemented completely in C and Python, and makes extensive use of CPython extension hooks and knowledge of the CPython reference counting implementation, which is part of the reason why it is so hard to port to other implementations of Python.
namedtuple will have to be implemented differently. I think it can be accomplished by defining the class with type()? Maybe with a metaclass...
I've done it using more or less that method. The code is in the "coll" sub-package of my plib.stdlib project; the Python 2 version is here on bitbucket:
If you like writing in functional style, namedtuples are much more natural than dict or classes, and more efficient to boot.
from collections import namedtuple
class Foo(namedtuple("Foo", "a b c")):
@property
def sum(self):
return self.a + self.b + self.c
f = Foo(1,2,3)
print f.sumThanks so much for bringing it up.
Namedtuples are a way to preserve the data unless the consuming code _really_ wants to change it, which is sometimes legitimate.
I'm not totally sold, as in some cases dictionaries or classes would add nice value. But namedtuples have a rigidity that makes you think twice before tampering with retrieved data.
1) You know before hand that the number of items won't be modified and the order matters since you are handling records. So it is a simple way of accomplishing that constraint.
2) Because they extend tuple they are inmutable too and therefore they don't store attributes per instance __dict__, field names are stored in the class so if you have tons of instances you save a lot of space.
Why creating a class if you just probably need a read-only interaction? But what about if you need some method? Then you can extend your namedtuple class and add the functionality you want. If for example you want to control the values of the fields when you are creating the namedtuple you can create your own namedtuple by overriding __new__. At that point it is worth it to take a look at https://pypi.python.org/pypi/recordclass.
(2) Apparently setting a __dict__ key works; they could be implemented like that.
I'm guessing pretty much the entire AST module is a no-go?
I managed to run into 2 trying to build a 5 line program :-)
$ cat t.py; ./tools/grumpc t.py > t.go;go build t.go;echo '----';./t
import sys
print sys.stdin.readline()
----
AttributeError: 'module' object has no attribute 'stdin'
$
$ cat t.py ;./tools/grumpc t.py
c = {}
top = sorted(c.items(), key=lambda (k,v): v)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "./tools/grumpc", line 102, in <module>
sys.exit(main(parser.parse_args()))
File "./tools/grumpc", line 60, in main
visitor.visit(mod)
File "/usr/local/Cellar/python/2.7.12/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/ast.py", line 241, in visit
return visitor(node)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/stmt.py", line 302, in visit_Module
self._visit_each(node.body)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/stmt.py", line 632, in _visit_each
self.visit(node)
File "/usr/local/Cellar/python/2.7.12/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/ast.py", line 241, in visit
return visitor(node)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/stin visit_Assign
with self.expr_visitor.visit(node.value) as value:
File "/usr/local/Cellar/python/2.7.12/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/ast.py", line 241, in visit
return visitor(node)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/expr_visitor.py", line 101, in visit_Call
values.append((util.go_str(k.arg), self.visit(k.value)))
File "/usr/local/Cellar/python/2.7.12/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/ast.py", line 241, in visit
return visitor(node)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/expr_visitor.py", line 246, in visit_Lambda
return self.visit_function_inline(func_node)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/expr_visitor.py", line 388, in visit_function_inline
func_visitor = block.FunctionBlockVisitor(node)
File "/Users/foo/src/grumpy/build/lib/python2.7/site-packages/grumpy/compiler/block.py", line 432, in __init__
args = [a.id for a in node_args.args]
AttributeError: 'Tuple' object has no attribute 'id'1. Lambda tuple args are not yet supported -- I actually didn't know that was a thing :\ -- https://github.com/google/grumpy/issues/17
2. Even if that worked properly, sorted() is not yet implemented: https://github.com/google/grumpy/issues/16
def func((a,b)):
return b
mytuple = 1,2
print func(mytuple)
def func(t):
a,b = t
return b
This is probably the cleaner way to write that:
key=operator.itemgetter(1)
Basically, we needed to support a large existing Python 2.7 codebase. See discussion here: https://github.com/google/grumpy/issues/1
> It's a hard-code compiler, not an interpreter written in Go. That implies some restrictions, but the documentation doesn't say much about what they are. PyPy jumps through hoops to make all of Python's self modification at run-time features work, complicating PyPy enormously. Nobody uses that stuff in production code, and Google apparently dumped it.
There are restrictions. I'll update the README to make note of them. Basically, exec and eval don't work. Since we don't use those in production code at Google, this seemed acceptable.
> If Grumpy doesn't have a Global Interpreter Lock, it must have lower-level locking. Does every built-in data structure have a lock, or does the compiler have enough smarts to figure out what's shared across thread boundaries, or what?
It does fine grained locking. Mutable data structures like lists and dicts do their own locking. Incidentally, this is one reason why supporting C extensions would be complicated.