Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> writes: > On Mon, 16 Dec 2013 12:51:21 +1100, Ben Finney wrote: > ... "type(obj)" versus "obj.__class__" > That is an excellent question, I only wish I had an excellent answer to > give you. Obviously great minds think alike because I was going to ask > the same question, prompted by this comment from Nick Coghlan on the > python-dev list: > > "...type(obj).__name__ (working with the concrete type, ignoring any > proxying) or obj.__class__.__name__ (which takes proxying into > account)..." > > So there is a difference between them, but I'm not entirely sure what it > is.
I understand the difference: sometimes you work with proxies (e.g. "weakref" proxies). A proxie should work mostly like the proxied object - but in rare cases, you want to detect that what you have is actually a proxie rather than the real object. You can use "type(obj)" to check the real type ob "obj" (in some sense, it is more direct - more reliable; giving you the real type of "obj"). "obj.__class__" on the other hand uses standard attribute access - and proxying may have customized attribute access to access the proxied object's attributes rather than its own: then "obj.__class__" would give you not the type of "obj" (the proxie) but that of the proxied object. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
