@staticmethod or def function()?
My IDE (pycharm) suggests that I mark my class methods with @staticmethod when they don't use 'self'. Sounds good. I did that then it suggested I had the option to make a regular function instead, at the file level. That's a possibility. I was thinking that I'd leave the method in the class unless it was ever also used by another class. What do you think? -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: customer compare in assertEqual
On Monday, October 29, 2018 at 5:29:11 PM UTC-7, Stone Zhong wrote: > Hi There, > > Now I want to make sure my code calls a function foo with an object t, > however, foo.assert_called_once_with(t) does not work, since t is a model > object and the code may load a different copy of t, so what I really want to > test is "It calls foo with t where t.id equals real_t.id, is there a way to > do that in python unit test? > > Thanks, > Stone Thanks Peter, yeah, redefine the __eq__ works well. - Stone -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: @staticmethod or def function()?
I usually recommend my students to use @classmethod. It's a consistent API with a regular instance method, and receiving the class as first parameter (usually `cls`) is useful if you have to extend your classes. About separating a staticmethod in a regular function, it's mostly a matter of taste and organization. It's hard to say. Your intuition is good though, if you need to use the functionality by several classes, then it's probably not a staticmethod but an external function. On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 12:58 PM Tobiah wrote: > My IDE (pycharm) suggests that I mark my class methods > with @staticmethod when they don't use 'self'. Sounds > good. I did that then it suggested I had the option > to make a regular function instead, at the file level. > That's a possibility. I was thinking that I'd leave > the method in the class unless it was ever also used > by another class. What do you think? > > > > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- Santiago Basulto.- Up! -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: @staticmethod or def function()?
Tobiah wrote: > My IDE (pycharm) suggests that I mark my class methods > with @staticmethod when they don't use 'self'. Sounds > good. I did that then it suggested I had the option > to make a regular function instead, at the file level. > That's a possibility. I was thinking that I'd leave > the method in the class unless it was ever also used > by another class. What do you think? What do *you* think? Is your code demonstrably better if you turn the "normal" method into a static method? Do not make changes to your code only to apeace a linter. Regarding more the general question, should I use an instance method, a class method, a static method, or a function? -- that is hard to answer without an idea what the specific task of the function/method is, and how strong the link to the class is. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: @staticmethod or def function()?
On 10/31/18 8:53 AM, Tobiah wrote: My IDE (pycharm) suggests that I mark my class methods with @staticmethod when they don't use 'self'. Sounds good. I did that then it suggested I had the option to make a regular function instead, at the file level. That's a possibility. I was thinking that I'd leave the method in the class unless it was ever also used by another class. What do you think? It should be a staticmethod if the code is, while not linked to any instance in particular, still fundamentally inherent to the class itself and of little use outside the context of that class. It should be a stand-alone function if it provides stand-alone functionality. The decision is also almost certainly not worth the amount of thought you're giving it. -- Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology -- www.highlandtechnology.com Email address domain is currently out of order. See above to fix. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: @staticmethod or def function()?
Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de>: > Do not make changes to your code only to apeace a linter. Precisely. Don't let a tool drive a show. > Regarding more the general question, should I use an instance method, > a class method, a static method, or a function? -- that is hard to > answer without an idea what the specific task of the function/method > is, and how strong the link to the class is. I just always use regular instance methods. If I really want to "disappear" self, I'll just take the function out of the class. Marko -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
lint appeasement (was: @staticmethod or def function()?)
On 31Oct2018 21:23, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de>: Do not make changes to your code only to apeace a linter. Precisely. Don't let a tool drive a show. While this is sound for semantic changes (and a function versus a @staticmethod is verging on that), I would point out that cleaning lint is often useful in order to make the linter useful. If the useful lint warnings are buried in a sea of dross, and you want to lint things, then it can be well worth making some changes to clean up noise. Ideally of course the linter should recognise some hooks (typically special comments) to mark particular pieces of code as deliberately not matching the linter's opinions. And certainly I run some linters with various checks tuned or disabled. I'm doing this on an ongoing basis in my libraries as I work on other changes: make the change, debug, then lint, with the linting in distinct commits unless it is tiny. This is gardually bringing consistency to the code and catching the odd bug or rough edge such as "variable set but not used". The end game here is that your lint output should be empty so that when it isn't empty the messages are useful. Cheers, Cameron Simpson -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
