Correct way to write __repr__ function with inheritance

Question

I'm experimenting with OOP python and I wasn't sure about the __repr__ function inheritance. Since the parent class function looked like this:

def __repr__(self):
    '''Returns representation of the object'''
    return("{}({!r})".format("Class name", self._param))

I wanted to know if it is better to use a generic approach (which could be suitable for children classes as well) like the following one:

def __repr__(self):
    '''Returns representation of the object'''
    return("{}({!r})".format(self.__class__.__name__, self._param))

or if it is a good practice to override the function in every class.

Also, please ignore the encoding part, since I'm leaving it behind.

Answer 1

Well the __repr__ has a special meaning in Pythons data model:

object.__repr__(self)

Called by the repr() built-in function to compute the “official” string representation of an object. If at all possible, this should look like a valid Python expression that could be used to recreate an object with the same value (given an appropriate environment). If this is not possible, a string of the form <...some useful description...> should be returned. The return value must be a string object. If a class defines __repr__() but not __str__(), then __repr__() is also used when an “informal” string representation of instances of that class is required.

This is typically used for debugging, so it is important that the representation is information-rich and unambiguous.

That means the string that is returned by __repr__ should be usable to create another object just like it. So __repr__ is something that quite often needs overriding, not because of the __class__.__name__ but because the "state" has to be captured in the representation.

class A(object):
    def __init__(self, param):
        self._param = param

    def __repr__(self):
        '''Returns representation of the object'''
        return("{}({!r})".format(self.__class__.__name__, self._param))

Then you absolutely should override the __repr__ when you add parameters for __init__:

class B(A):
    def __init__(self, param1, param2):
        self._param = param1
        self._param2 = param2

    def __repr__(self):
        '''Returns representation of the object'''
        return("{}({!r})".format(self.__class__.__name__, self._param, self._param2))

But in case the __repr__ of the superclass still accurately "describes" the subclass then there's no point overloading the __repr__:

class B(A):
     pass

---

However it's always a good choice to use self.__class__.__name__ over hard-coding the class name, just in case you or someone else subclasses it.

Answer 2

Yes - - it is not just "ok", but it is what is more practical in almost every project and class hierarchy.

Actually, this is almost a perfect "text book example" of when to use class inheritance, and just let the code in the superclasses be reused.