I have a problem with return self
class Fib:
def __init__(self, max):
self.max = max
def __iter__(self):
self.a = 0
self.b = 1
return self
def __next__(self):
fib = self.a
if fib > self.max:
raise StopIteration
self.a, self.b = self.b, self.a + self.b
return fib
I have already seen this question return self problem but I can't understand what the benefit is of return self?
Returning self from a method simply means that your method returns a reference to the instance object on which it was called. This can sometimes be seen in use with object oriented APIs that are designed as a fluent interface that encourages method cascading. So, for example,
>>> class Counter(object):
... def __init__(self, start=1):
... self.val = start
... def increment(self):
... self.val += 1
... return self
... def decrement(self):
... self.val -= 1
... return self
...
>>> c = Counter()
Now we can use method cascading:
>>> c.increment().increment().decrement()
<__main__.Counter object at 0x1020c1390>
Notice, the last call to decrement() returned <__main__.Counter object at 0x1020c1390>, which is self.
Now:
>>> c.val
2
>>>
Notice, you cannot do this if you did not return self:
>>> class Counter(object):
... def __init__(self, start=1):
... self.val = start
... def increment(self):
... self.val += 1
... # implicitely return `None`
... def decrement(self):
... self.val -= 1
... # implicitely return `None`
...
>>> c = Counter()
>>> c.increment().increment()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'increment'
>>> c
<__main__.Counter object at 0x1020c15f8>
>>> c.val
2
>>>
Notice, not everyone is a fan of "method cascading" design. Python built-ins do not tend do this, so, list for example:
>>> x = list()
>>> x.append(1).append(2)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'NoneType' object has no attribute 'append'
>>>
The one place you do often see this is when your class implements the iterator protocol, where iter on an iterator returns self by convention, although this is suggested by the docs:
Having seen the mechanics behind the iterator protocol, it is easy to add iterator behavior to your classes. Define an
__iter__()method which returns an object with a__next__()method. If the class defines__next__(), then__iter__()can just returnself:class Reverse: """Iterator for looping over a sequence backwards.""" def __init__(self, data): self.data = data self.index = len(data) def __iter__(self): return self def __next__(self): if self.index == 0: raise StopIteration self.index = self.index - 1 return self.data[self.index]
Notice, this in effect makes your iterator only useful for a single pass (as it should be to properly follow the iterator protocol):
>>> x = [1, 2, 3, 4]
>>> it = iter(x)
>>> list(it)
[1, 2, 3, 4]
>>> list(it)
[]
>>> next(it)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
StopIteration
>>>
This is needlessly complex code. Pay little attention to it. There's no reason on earth to implement it this way.
That being said, what it does is this:
class Fib:
"""Implements the Fibonacci sequence."""
def __init__(self, max_):
self.max = max_
def __iter__(self):
"""Initializes and returns itself as an iterable."""
self.a = 0
self.b = 1
return self
def __next__(self):
"""What gets run on each execution of that iterable."""
fib = self.a
if fib > self.max:
raise StopIteration
self.a, self.b = self.b, self.a + self.b # increment
return fib
This is all much easier to express as:
def fib(max_):
a, b = 0, 1
while b <= max_:
out = a
a, b = b, a+b
yield out
Examples:
>>> fib_obj = Fib(20)
>>> for n in fib_obj:
... print(n)
>>> for n in Fib(20):
... print(n)
>>> for n in fib(20):
... print(n)
# all give....
0
1
1
2
3
5
8
13
