Exposing C++ interface in boost python
boost-python, c++, python
Solution
Abstract C++ classes cannot be exposed in this manner to Boost.Python. The Boost.Python tutorial gives examples as to how to expose pure virtual functions. In short, when decorating methods with `boost::python::pure_virtual`, a wrapper type needs to be created to allow C++ to polymorphic resolve the virtual function, and the virtual function implementation will delegate resolving the function polymorphically in the Python object's hierarchy.
struct BaseWrap : Base, boost::python::wrapper<Base>
{
int foo()
{
return this->get_override("foo")();
}
};
...
boost::python::class_<BaseWrap>("Base", ...)
.def("foo", boost::python::pure_virtual(&Base::foo))
;
For details, when a type is exposed via `boost::python::class_`, `HeldType` defaults to the type being exposed, and the `HeldType` is constructed within a Python object. The `class_` documentation states:
Template Parameter:
- `T`: The class being wrapped
- `HeldType`: Specifies the type that is actually embedded in a Python object wrapping a `T` instance [...]. Defaults to `T`.
Hence, the `boost::python::class_<Base>` will fail, because `T = Base` and `HeldType = Base`, and Boost.Python will try to instantiate an object of `HeldType` into a Python object that represents an instance of `Base`. This instantiation will fail as `Base` is an abstract class.
Here is a complete example showing the use of a `BaseWrap` class.
#include <boost/python.hpp>
struct Base
{
virtual int foo() = 0;
virtual ~Base() {}
};
struct Derived : public Base
{
virtual int foo()
{
return 42;
}
};
Base* get_base()
{
return new Derived;
}
namespace python = boost::python;
/// @brief Wrapper that will provide a non-abstract type for Base.
struct BaseWrap : Base, python::wrapper<Base>
{
BaseWrap() {}
BaseWrap(const Base& rhs)
: Base(rhs)
{}
int foo()
{
return this->get_override("foo")();
}
};
BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(example)
{
python::class_<BaseWrap>("Base")
.def("foo", python::pure_virtual(&Base::foo));
;
python::def("get_base", &get_base,
python::return_value_policy<python::manage_new_object>());
}
and its usage:
>>> import example
>>> class Spam(example.Base):
... pass
...
>>> Spam().foo()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
RuntimeError: Pure virtual function called
>>> class Egg(example.Base):
... def foo(self):
... return 100
...
>>> e = Egg()
>>> e.foo()
100
>>> d = example.get_base()
>>> d.foo()
42
It is possible to expose an abstract class in Boost.Python by exposing it with no default initializer (`boost::python::no_init`) and non-copyable (`boost::noncopyable`). The lack of an initializer prevents Python types from deriving from it effectively preventing overriding. Additionally, the implementation detail that `Base::foo()` is implemented within C++ by `Derived` is inconsequential. If Python should not know about a `foo()` method at all, then omit exposing it via `def()`.
#include <boost/python.hpp>
struct Base
{
virtual int foo() = 0;
virtual ~Base() {}
};
struct Derived
: public Base
{
virtual int foo()
{
return 42;
}
};
struct OtherDerived
: public Base
{
virtual int foo()
{
return 24;
}
};
Base* get_base()
{
return new Derived;
}
Base* get_other_base()
{
return new OtherDerived;
}
BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(example)
{
namespace python = boost::python;
python::class_<Base, boost::noncopyable>("Base", python::no_init)
;
python::class_<Derived, python::bases<Base> >("Derived", python::no_init)
.def("foo", &Base::foo)
;
python::class_<OtherDerived, python::bases<Base> >(
"OtherDerived", python::no_init)
;
python::def("get_base", &get_base,
python::return_value_policy<python::manage_new_object>());
python::def("get_other_base", &get_other_base,
python::return_value_policy<python::manage_new_object>());
}
Interactive usage:
>>> import example
>>> b = example.get_base()
>>> b.foo()
42
>>> b = example.get_other_base()
>>> b.foo()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module>
AttributeError: 'OtherDerived' object has no attribute 'foo'
Problem
Sample code to illustrate: ``` struct Base { virtual int foo() = 0; }; struct Derived : public Base { virtual int foo() { return 42; } }; Base* get_base() { return new Derived; } BOOST_PYTHON_MODULE(libTestMod) { py::class_<Base>("Base", py::no_init) .def("foo", py::pure_virtual(&Base::foo)); py::def("get_base", get_base, py::return_internal_reference<>()); //ignore mem leak } ``` - Base::foo will not be overridden in python - Base:foo will be implemented in c++ but that should not be exposed to python Tried the above code but fails to compile. update: Compilation Error: ``` /path/to/boostlib/boost/1.53.0-0/common/include/boost/python/object/value_holder.hpp:66:11: error: cannot declare field 'boost_1_53_0::python::objects::value_holder<Base>::m_held' to be of abstract type 'Base' Main.C:59:8: note: because the following virtual functions are pure within 'Base': Main.C:61:15: note: virtual int Base::foo() ```