Lines Matching refs:storing
25 'customization': '\nBasic customization\n*******************\n\nobject.__new__(cls[, ...])\n\n Called to create a new instance of class *cls*. ``__new__()`` is a\n static method (special-cased so you need not declare it as such)\n that takes the class of which an instance was requested as its\n first argument. The remaining arguments are those passed to the\n object constructor expression (the call to the class). The return\n value of ``__new__()`` should be the new object instance (usually\n an instance of *cls*).\n\n Typical implementations create a new instance of the class by\n invoking the superclass\'s ``__new__()`` method using\n ``super(currentclass, cls).__new__(cls[, ...])`` with appropriate\n arguments and then modifying the newly-created instance as\n necessary before returning it.\n\n If ``__new__()`` returns an instance of *cls*, then the new\n instance\'s ``__init__()`` method will be invoked like\n ``__init__(self[, ...])``, where *self* is the new instance and the\n remaining arguments are the same as were passed to ``__new__()``.\n\n If ``__new__()`` does not return an instance of *cls*, then the new\n instance\'s ``__init__()`` method will not be invoked.\n\n ``__new__()`` is intended mainly to allow subclasses of immutable\n types (like int, str, or tuple) to customize instance creation. It\n is also commonly overridden in custom metaclasses in order to\n customize class creation.\n\nobject.__init__(self[, ...])\n\n Called when the instance is created. The arguments are those\n passed to the class constructor expression. If a base class has an\n ``__init__()`` method, the derived class\'s ``__init__()`` method,\n if any, must explicitly call it to ensure proper initialization of\n the base class part of the instance; for example:\n ``BaseClass.__init__(self, [args...])``. As a special constraint\n on constructors, no value may be returned; doing so will cause a\n ``TypeError`` to be raised at runtime.\n\nobject.__del__(self)\n\n Called when the instance is about to be destroyed. This is also\n called a destructor. If a base class has a ``__del__()`` method,\n the derived class\'s ``__del__()`` method, if any, must explicitly\n call it to ensure proper deletion of the base class part of the\n instance. Note that it is possible (though not recommended!) for\n the ``__del__()`` method to postpone destruction of the instance by\n creating a new reference to it. It may then be called at a later\n time when this new reference is deleted. It is not guaranteed that\n ``__del__()`` methods are called for objects that still exist when\n the interpreter exits.\n\n Note: ``del x`` doesn\'t directly call ``x.__del__()`` --- the former\n decrements the reference count for ``x`` by one, and the latter\n is only called when ``x``\'s reference count reaches zero. Some\n common situations that may prevent the reference count of an\n object from going to zero include: circular references between\n objects (e.g., a doubly-linked list or a tree data structure with\n parent and child pointers); a reference to the object on the\n stack frame of a function that caught an exception (the traceback\n stored in ``sys.exc_traceback`` keeps the stack frame alive); or\n a reference to the object on the stack frame that raised an\n unhandled exception in interactive mode (the traceback stored in\n ``sys.last_traceback`` keeps the stack frame alive). The first\n situation can only be remedied by explicitly breaking the cycles;\n the latter two situations can be resolved by storing
61 storinglass getattribute invoked\n 10\n >>> type(c).__len__(c) # Explicit lookup via type\n Metaclass getattribute invoked\n 10\n >>> len(c) # Implicit lookup\n 10\n\nBypassing the ``__getattribute__()`` machinery in this fashion\nprovides significant scope for speed optimisations within the\ninterpreter, at the cost of some flexibility in the handling of\nspecial methods (the special method *must* be set on the class object\nitself in order to be consistently invoked by the interpreter).\n\n-[ Footnotes ]-\n\n[1] It *is* possible in some cases to change an object\'s type, under\n certain controlled conditions. It generally isn\'t a good idea\n though, since it can lead to some very strange behaviour if it is\n handled incorrectly.\n\n[2] For operands of the same type, it is assumed that if the non-\n reflected method (such as ``__add__()``) fails the operation is\n not supported, which is why the reflected method is not called.\n',
