I attempted to implement a mapping in Python by using the abstract base class, MutableMapping, but I got an error on instantiation. How would I go about making a working version of this dictionary that would emulate the builtin dict class, in as many ways as possible, to be clear, with Abstract Base Classes?
>>> class D(collections.MutableMapping):
... pass
...
>>> d = D()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: Can't instantiate abstract class D with abstract methods __delitem__, __getitem__, __iter__, __len__, __setitem__
A good answer will demonstrate how to make this work, specifically without subclassing dict (a concept that I am quite familiar with).
How would I implement a dict with Abstract Base Classes?
A good answer will demonstrate how to make this work, specifically without subclassing dict.
Here's the error message: TypeError: Can't instantiate abstract class D with abstract methods __delitem__, __getitem__, __iter__, __len__, __setitem__
It turns out that one must implement them to use the Abstract Base Class (ABC), MutableMapping.
So I implement a mapping that works like a dict in most respects that uses the object's attribute reference dict for the mapping. (Delegation is not the same as inheritance, so we'll just delegate to the instance __dict__, we could use any other ad-hoc mapping, but you don't seem to care about that part of the implementation. It makes sense to do it this way in Python 2, because MutableMapping doesn't have __slots__ in Python 2, so you're creating a __dict__ either way. In Python 3, you could avoid dicts altogether by setting __slots__.)
from collections.abc import MutableMapping
class D(MutableMapping):
'''
Mapping that works like both a dict and a mutable object, i.e.
d = D(foo='bar')
and
d.foo returns 'bar'
'''
# ``__init__`` method required to create instance from class.
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
'''Use the object dict'''
self.__dict__.update(*args, **kwargs)
# The next five methods are requirements of the ABC.
def __setitem__(self, key, value):
self.__dict__[key] = value
def __getitem__(self, key):
return self.__dict__[key]
def __delitem__(self, key):
del self.__dict__[key]
def __iter__(self):
return iter(self.__dict__)
def __len__(self):
return len(self.__dict__)
# The final two methods aren't required, but nice for demo purposes:
def __str__(self):
'''returns simple dict representation of the mapping'''
return str(self.__dict__)
def __repr__(self):
'''echoes class, id, & reproducible representation in the REPL'''
return '{}, D({})'.format(super(D, self).__repr__(),
self.__dict__)
And to demonstrate the usage:
>>> d = D((e, i) for i, e in enumerate('abc'))
>>> d
<__main__.D object at 0x7f75eb242e50>, D({'b': 1, 'c': 2, 'a': 0})
>>> d.a
0
>>> d.get('b')
1
>>> d.setdefault('d', []).append(3)
>>> d.foo = 'bar'
>>> print(d)
{'b': 1, 'c': 2, 'a': 0, 'foo': 'bar', 'd': [3]}
And for ensuring the dict API, lesson learned is that you can always check for collections.abc.MutableMapping:
>>> isinstance(d, MutableMapping)
True
>>> isinstance(dict(), MutableMapping)
True
And while a dict is always going to be an instance of a MutableMapping due to registration on collections import, the reverse is not always true:
>>> isinstance(d, dict)
False
>>> isinstance(d, (dict, MutableMapping))
True
After performing this exercise, it is clear to me that using Abstract Base Classes provides only the guarantee of a standard API for users of the class. In this case, users assuming a MutableMapping object will be guaranteed the standard API for Python.
The fromkeys class constructor method is not implemented.
>>> dict.fromkeys('abc')
{'b': None, 'c': None, 'a': None}
>>> D.fromkeys('abc')
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: type object 'D' has no attribute 'fromkeys'
One could mask the builtin dict methods like get or setdefault
>>> d['get'] = 'baz'
>>> d.get('get')
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
TypeError: 'str' object is not callable
It's fairly simple to unmask again:
>>> del d['get']
>>> d.get('get', 'Not there, but working')
'Not there, but working'
But I wouldn't use this code in production.
Demonstration without a dict, Python 3:
>>> class MM(MutableMapping):
... __delitem__, __getitem__, __iter__, __len__, __setitem__ = (None,) *5
... __slots__ = ()
...
>>> MM().__dict__
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'MM' object has no attribute '__dict__'