Is there any rule about which built-in and standard library classes are not subclassable ("final")?
As of Python 3.3, here are a few examples:
bool
function
operator.itemgetter
slice
I found a question which deals with the implementation of "final" classes, both in C and pure Python.
I would like to understand what reasons may explain why a class is chosen to be "final" in the first place.
Definitions: A class that is derived from another class is called a subclass (also a derived class, extended class, or child class). The class from which the subclass is derived is called a superclass (also a base class or a parent class).
A final class cannot extended to create a subclass. All methods in a final class are implicitly final . Class String is an example of a final class.
Abstract classes cannot be instantiated, but they can be subclassed.
You can prevent a class from being subclassed by using the final keyword in the class's declaration. Similarly, you can prevent a method from being overridden by subclasses by declaring it as a final method. An abstract class can only be subclassed; it cannot be instantiated.
There seems to be two reasons for a class to be "final" in Python.
1. Violation of Class Invariant
Classes that follow Singleton pattern have an invariant that there's a limited (pre-determined) number of instances. Any violation of this invariant in a subclass will be inconsistent with the class' intent, and would not work correctly. Examples:
bool
: True
, False
; see Guido's comments
NoneType
: None
NotImplementedType
: NotImplemented
ellipsis
: Ellipsis
There may be cases other than the Singleton pattern in this category but I'm not aware of any.
2. No Persuasive Use Case
A class implemented in C requires additional work to allow subclassing (at least in CPython). Doing such work without a convincing use case is not very attractive, so volunteers are less likely to come forward. Examples:
function
; see Tim Peters' post
Note 1:
I originally thought there were valid use cases, but simply insufficient interest, in subclassing of function
and operator.itemgetter
. Thanks to @agf for pointing out that the use cases offered here and here are not convincing (see @agf comments to the question).
Note 2:
My concern is that another Python implementation might accidentally allow subclassing a class that's final in CPython. This may result in non-portable code (a use case may be weak, but someone might still write code that subclasses function
if their Python supports it). This can be resolved by marking in Python documentation all built-in and standard library classes that cannot be subclassed, and requiring that all implementations follow CPython behavior in that respect.
Note 3:
The message produced by CPython in all the above cases is:
TypeError: type 'bool' is not an acceptable base type
It is quite cryptic, as numerous questions on this subject show. I'll submit a suggestion to add a paragraph to the documentation that explains final classes, and maybe even change the error message to:
TypeError: type 'bool' is final (non-extensible)
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With