Python code for methods

[lars-reimann]

Describe the bug

Currently, the following code is generated for methods:

class Class_1_Module_1:
    def __init__(self, only_param):
        folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1.__init__(only_param)

    def instance_method_1(self, only_param):
        folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1.instance_method_1(only_param)

Calling the original method requires an instance of the original class, but here it is done as a static call on the class.

To Reproduce

Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Import the minimal test data.
2. Click on 'Infer'

Expected behavior

The following code should be generated:

class Class_1_Module_1:
    def __init__(self, only_param):
        self.instance = folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1(only_param)

    def instance_method_1(self, only_param):
        self.instance.instance_method_1(only_param)

Exception 1: Original method has @staticmethod decorator

Then the generated code should look like this:

class Class_1_Module_1:
    def __init__(only_param):
        folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1(only_param)

    @staticmethod # <--- only add this decorator
    def static_method_1(only_param):
        folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1.static_method_1(only_param)

Exception 2: Original method has @classmethod decorator

Then the generated code should look like this:

class Class_1_Module_1:
    def __init__(only_param):
        folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1(only_param)

    @staticmethod # <--- add this decorator (we don't support class methods directly)
    def class_method_1(only_param): # <--- first parameter of original method is cls; it should be removed from the new interface
        folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1.class_method_1(only_param)

[paul0314]

I still have two questions regarding the examples above:

1. Inside the __init__ method, is "self.instance = folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1(only_param)", as mentioned in the code snippets, correct or should it be "self.instance = folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1.__init__(only_param)? If it's correct as is, do we still need to call the __init__ method of the class of the original module or is it implicitly done via calling the class?
2. Are there any differences if the original class didn't have an __init__ method?

[lars-reimann]

1. Inside the init method, is "self.instance = folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1(only_param)", as mentioned in the code snippets, correct or should it be "self.instance = folder1.folder2.folder3.module_1.Class_1_Module_1.init(only_param)? If it's correct as is, do we still need to call the init method of the class of the original module or is it implicitly done via calling the class?

The snippet is correct, you don't call __init__ explicitly. By "calling the class" Python first calls its __new__ method, then the __init__ method.

2. Are there any differences if the original class didn't have an init method?

There is always a default __init__ method without parameters (except self) that does nothing.