．．如何在C中“正确地”做这件事?

你可以使用Cython为Python创建一个扩展类型:

cdef class Immutable:
    cdef readonly object a, b
    cdef object __weakref__ # enable weak referencing support

    def __init__(self, a, b):
        self.a, self.b = a, b

它既适用于Python 2。X和3。

测试

# compile on-the-fly
import pyximport; pyximport.install() # $ pip install cython
from immutable import Immutable

o = Immutable(1, 2)
assert o.a == 1, str(o.a)
assert o.b == 2

try: o.a = 3
except AttributeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'attribute must be readonly'

try: o[1]
except TypeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'indexing must not be supported'

try: o.c = 1
except AttributeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'no new attributes are allowed'

o = Immutable('a', [])
assert o.a == 'a'
assert o.b == []

o.b.append(3) # attribute may contain mutable object
assert o.b == [3]

try: o.c
except AttributeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'no c attribute'

o = Immutable(b=3,a=1)
assert o.a == 1 and o.b == 3

try: del o.b
except AttributeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, "can't delete attribute"

d = dict(b=3, a=1)
o = Immutable(**d)
assert o.a == d['a'] and o.b == d['b']

o = Immutable(1,b=3)
assert o.a == 1 and o.b == 3

try: object.__setattr__(o, 'a', 1)
except AttributeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'attributes are readonly'

try: object.__setattr__(o, 'c', 1)
except AttributeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'no new attributes'

try: Immutable(1,c=3)
except TypeError:
    pass
else:
    assert 0, 'accept only a,b keywords'

for kwd in [dict(a=1), dict(b=2)]:
    try: Immutable(**kwd)
    except TypeError:
        pass
    else:
        assert 0, 'Immutable requires exactly 2 arguments'

如果你不介意索引支持，那么@Sven Marnach建议的collections.namedtuple是更可取的:

Immutable = collections.namedtuple("Immutable", "a b")

这种方式不停止对象。__setattr__从工作，但我仍然发现它有用:

class A(object):

    def __new__(cls, children, *args, **kwargs):
        self = super(A, cls).__new__(cls)
        self._frozen = False  # allow mutation from here to end of  __init__
        # other stuff you need to do in __new__ goes here
        return self

    def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
        super(A, self).__init__()
        self._frozen = True  # prevent future mutation

    def __setattr__(self, name, value):
        # need to special case setting _frozen.
        if name != '_frozen' and self._frozen:
            raise TypeError('Instances are immutable.')
        else:
            super(A, self).__setattr__(name, value)

    def __delattr__(self, name):
        if self._frozen:
            raise TypeError('Instances are immutable.')
        else:
            super(A, self).__delattr__(name)

你可能需要根据用例重写更多的东西(比如__setitem__)。

最简单的方法是使用__slots__:

class A(object):
    __slots__ = []

A的实例现在是不可变的，因为您不能在它们上设置任何属性。

如果你想让类实例包含数据，你可以将this和derived from tuple结合起来:

from operator import itemgetter
class Point(tuple):
    __slots__ = []
    def __new__(cls, x, y):
        return tuple.__new__(cls, (x, y))
    x = property(itemgetter(0))
    y = property(itemgetter(1))

p = Point(2, 3)
p.x
# 2
p.y
# 3

编辑:如果你想摆脱索引，你可以重写__getitem__():

class Point(tuple):
    __slots__ = []
    def __new__(cls, x, y):
        return tuple.__new__(cls, (x, y))
    @property
    def x(self):
        return tuple.__getitem__(self, 0)
    @property
    def y(self):
        return tuple.__getitem__(self, 1)
    def __getitem__(self, item):
        raise TypeError

注意，不能使用operator。在这种情况下，属性的itemgetter，因为这将依赖于Point.__getitem__()而不是tuple.__getitem__()。此外，这不会阻止使用元组。__getitem__(p, 0)，但我很难想象这应该如何构成一个问题。

我不认为创建不可变对象的“正确”方法是编写C扩展。Python通常依赖于库实现者和库用户是成年人，而不是真正强制执行接口，接口应该在文档中清楚地说明。这就是为什么我不认为通过调用object.__setattr__()来规避被重写的__setattr__()是一个问题的可能性。如果有人这么做，风险自负。

我使用了与Alex相同的想法:一个元类和一个“init marker”，但结合重写__setattr__:

>>> from abc import ABCMeta
>>> _INIT_MARKER = '_@_in_init_@_'
>>> class _ImmutableMeta(ABCMeta):
... 
...     """Meta class to construct Immutable."""
... 
...     def __call__(cls, *args, **kwds):
...         obj = cls.__new__(cls, *args, **kwds)
...         object.__setattr__(obj, _INIT_MARKER, True)
...         cls.__init__(obj, *args, **kwds)
...         object.__delattr__(obj, _INIT_MARKER)
...         return obj
...
>>> def _setattr(self, name, value):
...     if hasattr(self, _INIT_MARKER):
...         object.__setattr__(self, name, value)
...     else:
...         raise AttributeError("Instance of '%s' is immutable."
...                              % self.__class__.__name__)
...
>>> def _delattr(self, name):
...     raise AttributeError("Instance of '%s' is immutable."
...                          % self.__class__.__name__)
...
>>> _im_dict = {
...     '__doc__': "Mix-in class for immutable objects.",
...     '__copy__': lambda self: self,   # self is immutable, so just return it
...     '__setattr__': _setattr,
...     '__delattr__': _delattr}
...
>>> Immutable = _ImmutableMeta('Immutable', (), _im_dict)

注意:我直接调用元类，以使它在Python 2中都能工作。X和3.x。

>>> class T1(Immutable):
... 
...     def __init__(self, x=1, y=2):
...         self.x = x
...         self.y = y
...
>>> t1 = T1(y=8)
>>> t1.x, t1.y
(1, 8)
>>> t1.x = 7
AttributeError: Instance of 'T1' is immutable.

它也适用于插槽…:

>>> class T2(Immutable):
... 
...     __slots__ = 's1', 's2'
... 
...     def __init__(self, s1, s2):
...         self.s1 = s1
...         self.s2 = s2
...
>>> t2 = T2('abc', 'xyz')
>>> t2.s1, t2.s2
('abc', 'xyz')
>>> t2.s1 += 'd'
AttributeError: Instance of 'T2' is immutable.

．.． 和多重继承:

>>> class T3(T1, T2):
... 
...     def __init__(self, x, y, s1, s2):
...         T1.__init__(self, x, y)
...         T2.__init__(self, s1, s2)
...
>>> t3 = T3(12, 4, 'a', 'b')
>>> t3.x, t3.y, t3.s1, t3.s2
(12, 4, 'a', 'b')
>>> t3.y -= 3
AttributeError: Instance of 'T3' is immutable.

但是请注意，可变属性仍然是可变的:

>>> t3 = T3(12, [4, 7], 'a', 'b')
>>> t3.y.append(5)
>>> t3.y
[4, 7, 5]

我不认为这是完全可能的，除非使用一个元组或namedtuple。无论如何，如果你重写了__setattr__()，用户总是可以通过直接调用object.__setattr__()来绕过它。任何依赖__setattr__的解决方案都保证不起作用。

以下是不使用某种元组可以得到的最接近的结果:

class Immutable:
    __slots__ = ['a', 'b']
    def __init__(self, a, b):
        object.__setattr__(self, 'a', a)
        object.__setattr__(self, 'b', b)
    def __setattr__(self, *ignored):
        raise NotImplementedError
    __delattr__ = __setattr__

但如果你足够努力，它就会破裂:

>>> t = Immutable(1, 2)
>>> t.a
1
>>> object.__setattr__(t, 'a', 2)
>>> t.a
2

但Sven对namedtuple的使用确实是不可变的。

更新

由于这个问题已经更新为询问如何在C中正确地做这件事，下面是我关于如何在Cython中正确地做这件事的答案:

第一个immutable.pyx:

cdef class Immutable:
    cdef object _a, _b

    def __init__(self, a, b):
        self._a = a
        self._b = b

    property a:
        def __get__(self):
            return self._a

    property b:
        def __get__(self):
            return self._b

    def __repr__(self):
        return "<Immutable {0}, {1}>".format(self.a, self.b)

和一个setup.py来编译它(使用命令setup.py build_ext——inplace:

from distutils.core import setup
from distutils.extension import Extension
from Cython.Distutils import build_ext

ext_modules = [Extension("immutable", ["immutable.pyx"])]

setup(
  name = 'Immutable object',
  cmdclass = {'build_ext': build_ext},
  ext_modules = ext_modules
)

然后试试吧:

>>> from immutable import Immutable
>>> p = Immutable(2, 3)
>>> p
<Immutable 2, 3>
>>> p.a = 1
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: attribute 'a' of 'immutable.Immutable' objects is not writable
>>> object.__setattr__(p, 'a', 1)
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: attribute 'a' of 'immutable.Immutable' objects is not writable
>>> p.a, p.b
(2, 3)
>>>      

另一个想法是完全不允许__setattr__而使用object。构造函数中的__setattr__:

class Point(object):
    def __init__(self, x, y):
        object.__setattr__(self, "x", x)
        object.__setattr__(self, "y", y)
    def __setattr__(self, *args):
        raise TypeError
    def __delattr__(self, *args):
        raise TypeError

当然你可以用object。__setattr__(p， "x"， 3)来修改一个Point实例p，但您的原始实现遭受同样的问题(尝试tuple。__setattr__(i， "x"， 42)在一个不可变实例)。

您可以在原始实现中应用相同的技巧:去掉__getitem__()，并在属性函数中使用tuple.__getitem__()。