In the interest of reusing some existing code that was defined as an instance method of a different class, I was tying to do something like the following:
cl
It happens because python wraps class functions as an "unbound method" which performs this type checking. There's some description of the decisions involved in this here.
Note that this type checking has actually been dropped in python 3 (see the note at the end of that article), so your approach will work there.
Looks like this works:
Foo.hello.im_func(bar)
Hello, I am Bar.
I guess I need to read a this little harder...
This is an old question, but Python has evolved and looks like it's worth pointing it out:
with Python 3 there's no more <unbound method C.x>
, since an unbound method is simply a <function __main__.C.x>
!
Which probably means the code in the original question should not be considered /that/ off. Python has always been about duck typing in any case, hasn't it?!
Note that there's also an alternative solution to the "explorative" question (see Python: Bind an Unbound Method?):
In [6]: a = A.a.im_func.__get__(B(), B)
In [7]: a
Out[7]: <bound method B.a of <__main__.B instance at 0x7f37d81a1ea8>>
In [8]: a(2)
2
Ref:
In [1]: class A():
def a(self, a=0):
print a
...:
In [2]: A.a
Out[2]: <unbound method A.a>
In [3]: A.a.im_func
Out[3]: <function __main__.a>
In [4]: A.a(B())
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
TypeError Traceback (most recent call last)
<ipython-input-4-7694121f3429> in <module>()
----> 1 A.a(B())
TypeError: unbound method a() must be called with A instance as first argument (got B instance instead)
In [2]: class A():
def a(self, a=0):
print(a)
...:
In [3]: def a():
...: pass
...:
In [4]: class B():
...: pass
In [5]: A.a(B())
0
In [6]: A.a
Out[6]: <function __main__.A.a>
A while back I wondered about the same "feature" in Perl on PerlMonks, and the general consensus was that while it works (as it does in Python) you should not be doing things that way.