186
votes

When I attempt to use a static method from within the body of the class, and define the static method using the built-in staticmethod function as a decorator, like this:

class Klass(object):

    @staticmethod  # use as decorator
    def _stat_func():
        return 42

    _ANS = _stat_func()  # call the staticmethod

    def method(self):
        ret = Klass._stat_func() + Klass._ANS
        return ret

I get the following error:

Traceback (most recent call last):<br>
  File "call_staticmethod.py", line 1, in <module>
    class Klass(object): 
  File "call_staticmethod.py", line 7, in Klass
    _ANS = _stat_func() 
  TypeError: 'staticmethod' object is not callable

I understand why this is happening (descriptor binding), and can work around it by manually converting _stat_func() into a staticmethod after its last use, like so:

class Klass(object):

    def _stat_func():
        return 42

    _ANS = _stat_func()  # use the non-staticmethod version

    _stat_func = staticmethod(_stat_func)  # convert function to a static method

    def method(self):
        ret = Klass._stat_func() + Klass._ANS
        return ret

So my question is:

Are there better, as in cleaner or more "Pythonic", ways to accomplish this?

6
If you're asking about Pythonicity, then the standard advice is not to use staticmethod at all. They are usually more useful as module-level functions, in which case your problem is not an issue. classmethod, on the other hand... - Benjamin Hodgson♦
@poorsod: Yes, I'm aware of that alternative. However in the actual code where I encountered this issue, making the function a static method rather than putting it at module-level makes more sense than it does in the simple example used in my question. - martineau
@CallMarl: Python isn't C++ and doesn't have protected methods. Prepending an _ to a method name is simply a convention to indicate that something is private (although the language doesn't enforce it) — and may or may not have any bearing w.r.t. inheritance. Regardless, the code in my question is simply for illustrating the problem with calling static methods. - martineau
@martineau That is right, it's only calling convention. When simple _ mean protected and double __ mean private. Then as I say, in this case applying protected (by calling convention) on static method mean nothing. - CallMarl
@CallMarl: As I indicated already, the code just something I threw together to post with my question. - martineau

6 Answers

209
votes

staticmethod objects apparently have a __func__ attribute storing the original raw function (makes sense that they had to). So this will work:

class Klass(object):

    @staticmethod  # use as decorator
    def stat_func():
        return 42

    _ANS = stat_func.__func__()  # call the staticmethod

    def method(self):
        ret = Klass.stat_func()
        return ret

As an aside, though I suspected that a staticmethod object had some sort of attribute storing the original function, I had no idea of the specifics. In the spirit of teaching someone to fish rather than giving them a fish, this is what I did to investigate and find that out (a C&P from my Python session):

>>> class Foo(object):
...     @staticmethod
...     def foo():
...         return 3
...     global z
...     z = foo

>>> z
<staticmethod object at 0x0000000002E40558>
>>> Foo.foo
<function foo at 0x0000000002E3CBA8>
>>> dir(z)
['__class__', '__delattr__', '__doc__', '__format__', '__func__', '__get__', '__getattribute__', '__hash__', '__init__', '__new__', '__reduce__', '__reduce_ex__', '__repr__', '__setattr__', '__sizeof__', '__str__', '__subclasshook__']
>>> z.__func__
<function foo at 0x0000000002E3CBA8>

Similar sorts of digging in an interactive session (dir is very helpful) can often solve these sorts of question very quickly.

32
votes

This is the way I prefer:

class Klass(object):

    @staticmethod
    def stat_func():
        return 42

    _ANS = stat_func.__func__()

    def method(self):
        return self.__class__.stat_func() + self.__class__._ANS

I prefer this solution to Klass.stat_func, because of the DRY principle. Reminds me of the reason why there is a new super() in Python 3 :)

But I agree with the others, usually the best choice is to define a module level function.

For instance with @staticmethod function, the recursion might not look very good (You would need to break DRY principle by calling Klass.stat_func inside Klass.stat_func). That's because you don't have reference to self inside static method. With module level function, everything will look OK.

12
votes

What about injecting the class attribute after the class definition?

class Klass(object):

    @staticmethod  # use as decorator
    def stat_func():
        return 42

    def method(self):
        ret = Klass.stat_func()
        return ret

Klass._ANS = Klass.stat_func()  # inject the class attribute with static method value
11
votes

This is due to staticmethod being a descriptor and requires a class-level attribute fetch to exercise the descriptor protocol and get the true callable.

From the source code:

It can be called either on the class (e.g. C.f()) or on an instance (e.g. C().f()); the instance is ignored except for its class.

But not directly from inside the class while it is being defined.

But as one commenter mentioned, this is not really a "Pythonic" design at all. Just use a module level function instead.

8
votes

What about this solution? It does not rely on knowledge of @staticmethod decorator implementation. Inner class StaticMethod plays as a container of static initialization functions.

class Klass(object):

    class StaticMethod:
        @staticmethod  # use as decorator
        def _stat_func():
            return 42

    _ANS = StaticMethod._stat_func()  # call the staticmethod

    def method(self):
        ret = self.StaticMethod._stat_func() + Klass._ANS
        return ret
0
votes

If the "core problem" is assigning class variables using functions, an alternative is to use a metaclass (it's kind of "annoying" and "magical" and I agree that the static method should be callable inside the class, but unfortunately it isn't). This way, we can refactor the behavior into a standalone function and don't clutter the class.

class KlassMetaClass(type(object)):
    @staticmethod
    def _stat_func():
        return 42

    def __new__(cls, clsname, bases, attrs):
        # Call the __new__ method from the Object metaclass
        super_new = super().__new__(cls, clsname, bases, attrs)
        # Modify class variable "_ANS"
        super_new._ANS = cls._stat_func()
        return super_new

class Klass(object, metaclass=KlassMetaClass):
    """
    Class that will have class variables set pseudo-dynamically by the metaclass
    """
    pass

print(Klass._ANS) # prints 42

Using this alternative "in the real world" may be problematic. I had to use it to override class variables in Django classes, but in other circumstances maybe it's better to go with one of the alternatives from the other answers.