我认为这和PEP 227有关

Names in class scope are not accessible. Names are resolved in the innermost enclosing function scope. If a class definition occurs in a chain of nested scopes, the resolution process skips class definitions. This rule prevents odd interactions between class attributes and local variable access. If a name binding operation occurs in a class definition, it creates an attribute on the resulting class object. To access this variable in a method, or in a function nested within a method, an attribute reference must be used, either via self or via the class name.

正如Python中的self所解释的那样，Demystified

任何类似obj.meth(args)的东西都会变成Class。甲安菲他明(obj, args)。调用进程是自动的，而接收进程不是(它的显式)。这就是类中函数的第一个形参必须是对象本身的原因。

class Point(object):
    def __init__(self,x = 0,y = 0):
        self.x = x
        self.y = y

    def distance(self):
        """Find distance from origin"""
        return (self.x**2 + self.y**2) ** 0.5

调用:

>>> p1 = Point(6,8)
>>> p1.distance()
10.0

init()定义了三个参数，但我们只传递了两个(6和8)。同样，distance()需要一个参数，但传递了0个参数。

为什么Python没有抱怨这个参数号不匹配?

Generally, when we call a method with some arguments, the corresponding class function is called by placing the method's object before the first argument. So, anything like obj.meth(args) becomes Class.meth(obj, args). The calling process is automatic while the receiving process is not (its explicit). This is the reason the first parameter of a function in class must be the object itself. Writing this parameter as self is merely a convention. It is not a keyword and has no special meaning in Python. We could use other names (like this) but I strongly suggest you not to. Using names other than self is frowned upon by most developers and degrades the readability of the code ("Readability counts"). ... In, the first example self.x is an instance attribute whereas x is a local variable. They are not the same and lie in different namespaces.

自我在这里停留 许多人建议在Python中使self成为关键字，就像在c++和Java中那样。这将消除方法中形式参数列表中显式self的冗余使用。虽然这个想法看起来很有希望，但它不会发生。至少近期不会。主要原因是向后兼容。下面是Python创建者自己的一篇博客，解释了为什么显式自我必须保留。

我建议大家应该读读Guido van Rossum关于这个话题的博客——为什么外显的自我必须留下来。

When a method definition is decorated, we don't know whether to automatically give it a 'self' parameter or not: the decorator could turn the function into a static method (which has no 'self'), or a class method (which has a funny kind of self that refers to a class instead of an instance), or it could do something completely different (it's trivial to write a decorator that implements '@classmethod' or '@staticmethod' in pure Python). There's no way without knowing what the decorator does whether to endow the method being defined with an implicit 'self' argument or not. I reject hacks like special-casing '@classmethod' and '@staticmethod'.

这是为了最小化方法和函数之间的差异。它允许您轻松地在元类中生成方法，或在运行时向已存在的类添加方法。

e.g.

>>> class C:
...     def foo(self):
...         print("Hi!")
...
>>>
>>> def bar(self):
...     print("Bork bork bork!")
...
>>>
>>> c = C()
>>> C.bar = bar
>>> c.bar()
Bork bork bork!
>>> c.foo()
Hi!
>>>

它还(据我所知)使python运行时的实现更容易。

我认为这和PEP 227有关

Names in class scope are not accessible. Names are resolved in the innermost enclosing function scope. If a class definition occurs in a chain of nested scopes, the resolution process skips class definitions. This rule prevents odd interactions between class attributes and local variable access. If a name binding operation occurs in a class definition, it creates an attribute on the resulting class object. To access this variable in a method, or in a function nested within a method, an attribute reference must be used, either via self or via the class name.

我喜欢引用彼得斯的《Python禅》。“明确的比含蓄的好。”

在Java和c++中，'this。'可以被推导出来，除非你的变量名使它无法推导。所以你有时需要它，有时不需要。

Python选择显式地做这样的事情，而不是基于规则。

此外，由于没有隐含或假设任何内容，部分实现将被公开。自我。__class__进行自我。__dict__和其他“内部”结构可以以一种明显的方式使用。