How to create Python abstract property in abstract classes?
In the following code, I created a base abstract class Base
. I want all the classes inheriting from Base
to provide the name
property, so I made it an @abstractmethod
.
Then, I created a subclass of Base
, called Base1
, which is meant to provide some functionality, but remain abstract. There is no name
property in Base1
, but Python still allows instantiation of that class without any error. How can I enforce the requirement for an abstract property in such cases?
from abc import ABCMeta, abstractmethod
class Base(object):
# class Base(metaclass = ABCMeta): <- Python 3
__metaclass__ = ABCMeta
def __init__(self, str_dir_config):
self.str_dir_config = str_dir_config
@abstractmethod
def _do_stuff(self, signals):
pass
@property
@abstractmethod
def name(self):
"""This property will be supplied by the inheriting classes individually."""
pass
class Base1(Base):
__metaclass__ = ABCMeta
"""This class does not provide the name property and should raise an error."""
def __init__(self, str_dir_config):
super(Base1, self).__init__(str_dir_config)
# super().__init__(str_dir_config) <- Python 3
def _do_stuff(self, signals):
print("Base_1 does stuff")
# print("Base_1 does stuff") <- Python 3
class C(Base1):
@property
def name(self):
return "class C"
if __name__ == "__main__":
b1 = Base1("ABC")
How can I enforce the name
property requirement in subclasses of Base
?
Hey! Great question. This issue is quite common when dealing with abstract classes in Python. Since Python 3.3, a bug was fixed, allowing the @property
decorator to work correctly with @abstractmethod
. Here’s how you can implement it:
For Python 3.3+:
from abc import ABC, abstractmethod
class C(ABC):
@property
@abstractmethod
def my_abstract_property(self):
pass
For Python 2, you’ll need to use @abstractproperty
instead:
from abc import ABCMeta, abstractproperty
class C:
__metaclass__ = ABCMeta
@abstractproperty
def my_abstract_property(self):
pass
The important point to note here is that the order of the decorators matters—@property
must always come before @abstractmethod
. This ensures that Python recognizes it correctly as an abstract property.
Totally agree with Priyanka’s explanation about decorator order! To expand on this, if you’re working in Python 3.x and need to enforce that all subclasses of Base
implement the name
property, you should define the Base
class as abstract and ensure it includes the @property
and @abstractmethod
decorators together.
Here’s a simple example of how the Base
class can be structured:
from abc import ABCMeta, abstractmethod
class Base:
__metaclass__ = ABCMeta
@property
@abstractmethod
def name(self):
"""This property must be implemented in all subclasses."""
pass
With this setup, if any subclass of Base
does not implement the name
property, it will raise an error. This approach ensures consistency across all subclasses.
Absolutely! Both of you make great points. For anyone using Python 3.3+ and wanting a foolproof way to implement and enforce a python abstract property
, here’s a concise example:
from abc import ABC, abstractmethod
class Base(ABC):
@property
@abstractmethod
def name(self):
"""Define an abstract property that must be overridden."""
pass
The key advantage of this approach in Python 3.x is that the ABC
class simplifies the use of metaclasses and ensures that all subclasses adhere to the rules defined by Base
. If a subclass fails to implement the name
property, Python will raise a TypeError
, signaling the developer to correct it.
For example:
class Derived(Base):
pass # TypeError: Can't instantiate abstract class Derived with abstract methods name
The added safety and readability make this the preferred way to enforce an abstract property.