I\'m a little confused by the following example from the python documentation here.
>>> class inch(float):
... \"Convert from inch to meter\"
...
Because inch
is a subclass of float, it satisfies all the requirements that the float.__new__()
instance factory has. It is the job of the __new__(cls) static method to create instances of the first argument, not of it's 'own' class.
Note the word 'static method' there. The __new__
factory is really just a specialist function tied to a class only for inheritance reasons. In other words, it is a function that plays well in a object-oriented hierarchy. You are supposed to find it via super()
or perhaps call it directly (as done here). The following would actually be a little more pythonic:
def __new__(cls, arg=0.0):
return super(inch, cls).__new__(cls, arg*0.0254)
because that would call the 'correct' __new__
function if inch
were to be used in a multiple-inheritance hierarchy; in this simple example it'll end up calling float.__new__
just the same.
So, __new__(cls, ...)
is expected to create an instance of type cls
. Why then tie it to a class at all and not make it a more generic function then? Because in the case of float.__new__(cls, value)
it not only creates a new instance of type cls
, it also sets it's initial value to value
. And in order for that to work, float.__new__(...)
needs to have intimate knowledge of what the float
class looks like. Because inch()
is a subclass of float()
, it has the exact same necessary bits to be a float()
too, and thus when the float.__new__()
factory creates a new inch
instance, all those bits are there to make it a inch()
instance instead.