[Python-Dev] Dataclasses, frozen and __post_init__
Nick Coghlan
ncoghlan at gmail.com
Tue Feb 20 08:03:25 EST 2018
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Tue Feb 20 08:03:25 EST 2018
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Dataclasses, frozen and __post_init__
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Dataclasses, frozen and __post_init__
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 20 February 2018 at 15:11, Steven D'Aprano <steve at pearwood.info> wrote: > So in principle, we could have a mutable class, and a immutable one, and > when you flick the switch, the instance.__class__ changes from mutable > to frozen. > > If you don't hate this, we can think about the details needed to get > it work in practice. This doesn't technically require any additional changes, as you can already do it with __post_init__: @dataclass class MyRecord: a: int b: str c: float def __post_init__(self): # self is still mutable here self.__class__ = _LockedMyRecord @dataclass(frozen=True) class _LockedMyRecord(MyRecord): pass This is also the kind of runtime behaviour modification where hiding how it's implemented is likely to create more problems than it solves, as even though having "type(obj)" and "obj.__class__" refer to different types is a formally supported state for instances, there are also lots of APIs where it isn't well defined whether an attribute lookup will use the nominal class or the true underlying type. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Coghlan | ncoghlan at gmail.com | Brisbane, Australia
- Previous message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Dataclasses, frozen and __post_init__
- Next message (by thread): [Python-Dev] Dataclasses, frozen and __post_init__
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list