pavlovevidence at gmail.com
Wed Sep 2 17:49:45 CEST 2009
On Sep 2, 7:06 am, Gary Robinson <gary... at me.com> wrote:
> When you define a class in a script, and then pickle
> instances of that class in the same script and store
> them to disk, you can't load that pickle in another
> script. At least not the straightforward way
> [pickle.load(file('somefile.pickle'))]. If you try it,
> you get an AttributeError during the unpickling
It's because when you pickle from the script it's defined in the
module is called '__main__'. When import the script file as a Python
module from another script, the module is called 'script' or whatever
the filename is. It's just the way importing works.
> There is no problem, of course, if the class is defined
> in a module which is imported by the pickling script.
> pickle.load(file('somefile.pickle')) then works.
> Rather than provide specific examples here, there's a
> blog post from 2005 that discusses this issue in depth
> and presents the problem very
> well:http://stefaanlippens.net/pickleproblem. (I tested
> in Python 2.6 yesterday and the same issue persists.)
Actually that page kind of glosses over the real issue. But never
> 1) Does this have to be the case, or is it a design
> problem with pickles that should be remedied?
It won't be remedied for the just sake of pickling. However, I'm
starting to think the underlying issue should be. It's by far the
most confusing aspect of Python.
> 2) Is there an easier way around it than moving the
> class definition to a separate module? The blog post I
> point to above suggests putting "__module__ =
> os.path.splitext(os.path.basename(__file__))" into
> the class definiton, but that's not working in my
> testing because when I do that, the pickling operation
> fails. Is there something else that can be done?
> This is obviously not a huge problem. Substantial
> classes should usually be defined in a separate module
> anyway. But sometimes it makes sense for a script to
> define a really simple, small class to hold some data,
> and needing to create a separate module just to contain
> such a class can be a little annoying.
My general recommendation is not to mix scripts a modules unless you
an expert on Python importing. A file should be either a script or a
module, not both.
Warning: It's really hard to be expert on Python importing. I've seen
confusion about how imports work even from some very smart people on
this list (most notably, from people who mistakenly believe that PEP
328 is a fix for your issue). Python importing is the biggest wart in
the language by far.
However, if you insist, I will tell you a workaround you can use. At
the very top of your script put the following lines (replacing script
with the module's filename minus the .py):
if __name__ == '__main__':
ismain = True
__name__ = 'script'
sys.modules['script'] = sys.modules['__main__']
ismain = False
Then use "if ismain" instead of "if __name__ == '__main__'" to
determine if you are running from a script. This has to come before
any class definitions or it won't work. This effectively renames the
script's __main__ module to what it would have been if it had been
imported. Then proceed with pickling as usual.
More information about the Python-list