xcoll 0.4.0__py3-none-any.whl → 0.5.0__py3-none-any.whl

xcoll/scattering_routines/geant4/collimasim/lib/pybind11/docs/classes.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,542 @@
+.. _classes:
+
+Object-oriented code
+####################
+
+Creating bindings for a custom type
+===================================
+
+Let's now look at a more complex example where we'll create bindings for a
+custom C++ data structure named ``Pet``. Its definition is given below:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    struct Pet {
+        Pet(const std::string &name) : name(name) { }
+        void setName(const std::string &name_) { name = name_; }
+        const std::string &getName() const { return name; }
+
+        std::string name;
+    };
+
+The binding code for ``Pet`` looks as follows:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    #include <pybind11/pybind11.h>
+
+    namespace py = pybind11;
+
+    PYBIND11_MODULE(example, m) {
+        py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+            .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+            .def("setName", &Pet::setName)
+            .def("getName", &Pet::getName);
+    }
+
+:class:`class_` creates bindings for a C++ *class* or *struct*-style data
+structure. :func:`init` is a convenience function that takes the types of a
+constructor's parameters as template arguments and wraps the corresponding
+constructor (see the :ref:`custom_constructors` section for details). An
+interactive Python session demonstrating this example is shown below:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    % python
+    >>> import example
+    >>> p = example.Pet("Molly")
+    >>> print(p)
+    <example.Pet object at 0x10cd98060>
+    >>> p.getName()
+    u'Molly'
+    >>> p.setName("Charly")
+    >>> p.getName()
+    u'Charly'
+
+.. seealso::
+
+    Static member functions can be bound in the same way using
+    :func:`class_::def_static`.
+
+Keyword and default arguments
+=============================
+It is possible to specify keyword and default arguments using the syntax
+discussed in the previous chapter. Refer to the sections :ref:`keyword_args`
+and :ref:`default_args` for details.
+
+Binding lambda functions
+========================
+
+Note how ``print(p)`` produced a rather useless summary of our data structure in the example above:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> print(p)
+    <example.Pet object at 0x10cd98060>
+
+To address this, we could bind a utility function that returns a human-readable
+summary to the special method slot named ``__repr__``. Unfortunately, there is no
+suitable functionality in the ``Pet`` data structure, and it would be nice if
+we did not have to change it. This can easily be accomplished by binding a
+Lambda function instead:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+        py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+            .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+            .def("setName", &Pet::setName)
+            .def("getName", &Pet::getName)
+            .def("__repr__",
+                [](const Pet &a) {
+                    return "<example.Pet named '" + a.name + "'>";
+                }
+            );
+
+Both stateless [#f1]_ and stateful lambda closures are supported by pybind11.
+With the above change, the same Python code now produces the following output:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> print(p)
+    <example.Pet named 'Molly'>
+
+.. [#f1] Stateless closures are those with an empty pair of brackets ``[]`` as the capture object.
+
+.. _properties:
+
+Instance and static fields
+==========================
+
+We can also directly expose the ``name`` field using the
+:func:`class_::def_readwrite` method. A similar :func:`class_::def_readonly`
+method also exists for ``const`` fields.
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+        py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+            .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+            .def_readwrite("name", &Pet::name)
+            // ... remainder ...
+
+This makes it possible to write
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = example.Pet("Molly")
+    >>> p.name
+    u'Molly'
+    >>> p.name = "Charly"
+    >>> p.name
+    u'Charly'
+
+Now suppose that ``Pet::name`` was a private internal variable
+that can only be accessed via setters and getters.
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    class Pet {
+    public:
+        Pet(const std::string &name) : name(name) { }
+        void setName(const std::string &name_) { name = name_; }
+        const std::string &getName() const { return name; }
+    private:
+        std::string name;
+    };
+
+In this case, the method :func:`class_::def_property`
+(:func:`class_::def_property_readonly` for read-only data) can be used to
+provide a field-like interface within Python that will transparently call
+the setter and getter functions:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+        py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+            .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+            .def_property("name", &Pet::getName, &Pet::setName)
+            // ... remainder ...
+
+Write only properties can be defined by passing ``nullptr`` as the
+input for the read function.
+
+.. seealso::
+
+    Similar functions :func:`class_::def_readwrite_static`,
+    :func:`class_::def_readonly_static` :func:`class_::def_property_static`,
+    and :func:`class_::def_property_readonly_static` are provided for binding
+    static variables and properties. Please also see the section on
+    :ref:`static_properties` in the advanced part of the documentation.
+
+Dynamic attributes
+==================
+
+Native Python classes can pick up new attributes dynamically:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> class Pet:
+    ...     name = "Molly"
+    ...
+    >>> p = Pet()
+    >>> p.name = "Charly"  # overwrite existing
+    >>> p.age = 2  # dynamically add a new attribute
+
+By default, classes exported from C++ do not support this and the only writable
+attributes are the ones explicitly defined using :func:`class_::def_readwrite`
+or :func:`class_::def_property`.
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+        .def(py::init<>())
+        .def_readwrite("name", &Pet::name);
+
+Trying to set any other attribute results in an error:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = example.Pet()
+    >>> p.name = "Charly"  # OK, attribute defined in C++
+    >>> p.age = 2  # fail
+    AttributeError: 'Pet' object has no attribute 'age'
+
+To enable dynamic attributes for C++ classes, the :class:`py::dynamic_attr` tag
+must be added to the :class:`py::class_` constructor:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet", py::dynamic_attr())
+        .def(py::init<>())
+        .def_readwrite("name", &Pet::name);
+
+Now everything works as expected:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = example.Pet()
+    >>> p.name = "Charly"  # OK, overwrite value in C++
+    >>> p.age = 2  # OK, dynamically add a new attribute
+    >>> p.__dict__  # just like a native Python class
+    {'age': 2}
+
+Note that there is a small runtime cost for a class with dynamic attributes.
+Not only because of the addition of a ``__dict__``, but also because of more
+expensive garbage collection tracking which must be activated to resolve
+possible circular references. Native Python classes incur this same cost by
+default, so this is not anything to worry about. By default, pybind11 classes
+are more efficient than native Python classes. Enabling dynamic attributes
+just brings them on par.
+
+.. _inheritance:
+
+Inheritance and automatic downcasting
+=====================================
+
+Suppose now that the example consists of two data structures with an
+inheritance relationship:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    struct Pet {
+        Pet(const std::string &name) : name(name) { }
+        std::string name;
+    };
+
+    struct Dog : Pet {
+        Dog(const std::string &name) : Pet(name) { }
+        std::string bark() const { return "woof!"; }
+    };
+
+There are two different ways of indicating a hierarchical relationship to
+pybind11: the first specifies the C++ base class as an extra template
+parameter of the :class:`class_`:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+       .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+       .def_readwrite("name", &Pet::name);
+
+    // Method 1: template parameter:
+    py::class_<Dog, Pet /* <- specify C++ parent type */>(m, "Dog")
+        .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+        .def("bark", &Dog::bark);
+
+Alternatively, we can also assign a name to the previously bound ``Pet``
+:class:`class_` object and reference it when binding the ``Dog`` class:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet> pet(m, "Pet");
+    pet.def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+       .def_readwrite("name", &Pet::name);
+
+    // Method 2: pass parent class_ object:
+    py::class_<Dog>(m, "Dog", pet /* <- specify Python parent type */)
+        .def(py::init<const std::string &>())
+        .def("bark", &Dog::bark);
+
+Functionality-wise, both approaches are equivalent. Afterwards, instances will
+expose fields and methods of both types:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = example.Dog("Molly")
+    >>> p.name
+    u'Molly'
+    >>> p.bark()
+    u'woof!'
+
+The C++ classes defined above are regular non-polymorphic types with an
+inheritance relationship. This is reflected in Python:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    // Return a base pointer to a derived instance
+    m.def("pet_store", []() { return std::unique_ptr<Pet>(new Dog("Molly")); });
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = example.pet_store()
+    >>> type(p)  # `Dog` instance behind `Pet` pointer
+    Pet          # no pointer downcasting for regular non-polymorphic types
+    >>> p.bark()
+    AttributeError: 'Pet' object has no attribute 'bark'
+
+The function returned a ``Dog`` instance, but because it's a non-polymorphic
+type behind a base pointer, Python only sees a ``Pet``. In C++, a type is only
+considered polymorphic if it has at least one virtual function and pybind11
+will automatically recognize this:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    struct PolymorphicPet {
+        virtual ~PolymorphicPet() = default;
+    };
+
+    struct PolymorphicDog : PolymorphicPet {
+        std::string bark() const { return "woof!"; }
+    };
+
+    // Same binding code
+    py::class_<PolymorphicPet>(m, "PolymorphicPet");
+    py::class_<PolymorphicDog, PolymorphicPet>(m, "PolymorphicDog")
+        .def(py::init<>())
+        .def("bark", &PolymorphicDog::bark);
+
+    // Again, return a base pointer to a derived instance
+    m.def("pet_store2", []() { return std::unique_ptr<PolymorphicPet>(new PolymorphicDog); });
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = example.pet_store2()
+    >>> type(p)
+    PolymorphicDog  # automatically downcast
+    >>> p.bark()
+    u'woof!'
+
+Given a pointer to a polymorphic base, pybind11 performs automatic downcasting
+to the actual derived type. Note that this goes beyond the usual situation in
+C++: we don't just get access to the virtual functions of the base, we get the
+concrete derived type including functions and attributes that the base type may
+not even be aware of.
+
+.. seealso::
+
+    For more information about polymorphic behavior see :ref:`overriding_virtuals`.
+
+
+Overloaded methods
+==================
+
+Sometimes there are several overloaded C++ methods with the same name taking
+different kinds of input arguments:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    struct Pet {
+        Pet(const std::string &name, int age) : name(name), age(age) { }
+
+        void set(int age_) { age = age_; }
+        void set(const std::string &name_) { name = name_; }
+
+        std::string name;
+        int age;
+    };
+
+Attempting to bind ``Pet::set`` will cause an error since the compiler does not
+know which method the user intended to select. We can disambiguate by casting
+them to function pointers. Binding multiple functions to the same Python name
+automatically creates a chain of function overloads that will be tried in
+sequence.
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+       .def(py::init<const std::string &, int>())
+       .def("set", static_cast<void (Pet::*)(int)>(&Pet::set), "Set the pet's age")
+       .def("set", static_cast<void (Pet::*)(const std::string &)>(&Pet::set), "Set the pet's name");
+
+The overload signatures are also visible in the method's docstring:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> help(example.Pet)
+
+    class Pet(__builtin__.object)
+     |  Methods defined here:
+     |
+     |  __init__(...)
+     |      Signature : (Pet, str, int) -> NoneType
+     |
+     |  set(...)
+     |      1. Signature : (Pet, int) -> NoneType
+     |
+     |      Set the pet's age
+     |
+     |      2. Signature : (Pet, str) -> NoneType
+     |
+     |      Set the pet's name
+
+If you have a C++14 compatible compiler [#cpp14]_, you can use an alternative
+syntax to cast the overloaded function:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+        .def("set", py::overload_cast<int>(&Pet::set), "Set the pet's age")
+        .def("set", py::overload_cast<const std::string &>(&Pet::set), "Set the pet's name");
+
+Here, ``py::overload_cast`` only requires the parameter types to be specified.
+The return type and class are deduced. This avoids the additional noise of
+``void (Pet::*)()`` as seen in the raw cast. If a function is overloaded based
+on constness, the ``py::const_`` tag should be used:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    struct Widget {
+        int foo(int x, float y);
+        int foo(int x, float y) const;
+    };
+
+    py::class_<Widget>(m, "Widget")
+       .def("foo_mutable", py::overload_cast<int, float>(&Widget::foo))
+       .def("foo_const",   py::overload_cast<int, float>(&Widget::foo, py::const_));
+
+If you prefer the ``py::overload_cast`` syntax but have a C++11 compatible compiler only,
+you can use ``py::detail::overload_cast_impl`` with an additional set of parentheses:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    template <typename... Args>
+    using overload_cast_ = pybind11::detail::overload_cast_impl<Args...>;
+
+    py::class_<Pet>(m, "Pet")
+        .def("set", overload_cast_<int>()(&Pet::set), "Set the pet's age")
+        .def("set", overload_cast_<const std::string &>()(&Pet::set), "Set the pet's name");
+
+.. [#cpp14] A compiler which supports the ``-std=c++14`` flag
+            or Visual Studio 2015 Update 2 and newer.
+
+.. note::
+
+    To define multiple overloaded constructors, simply declare one after the
+    other using the ``.def(py::init<...>())`` syntax. The existing machinery
+    for specifying keyword and default arguments also works.
+
+Enumerations and internal types
+===============================
+
+Let's now suppose that the example class contains internal types like enumerations, e.g.:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    struct Pet {
+        enum Kind {
+            Dog = 0,
+            Cat
+        };
+
+        struct Attributes {
+            float age = 0;
+        };
+
+        Pet(const std::string &name, Kind type) : name(name), type(type) { }
+
+        std::string name;
+        Kind type;
+        Attributes attr;
+    };
+
+The binding code for this example looks as follows:
+
+.. code-block:: cpp
+
+    py::class_<Pet> pet(m, "Pet");
+
+    pet.def(py::init<const std::string &, Pet::Kind>())
+        .def_readwrite("name", &Pet::name)
+        .def_readwrite("type", &Pet::type)
+        .def_readwrite("attr", &Pet::attr);
+
+    py::enum_<Pet::Kind>(pet, "Kind")
+        .value("Dog", Pet::Kind::Dog)
+        .value("Cat", Pet::Kind::Cat)
+        .export_values();
+
+    py::class_<Pet::Attributes> attributes(pet, "Attributes")
+        .def(py::init<>())
+        .def_readwrite("age", &Pet::Attributes::age);
+
+
+To ensure that the nested types ``Kind`` and ``Attributes`` are created within the scope of ``Pet``, the
+``pet`` :class:`class_` instance must be supplied to the :class:`enum_` and :class:`class_`
+constructor. The :func:`enum_::export_values` function exports the enum entries
+into the parent scope, which should be skipped for newer C++11-style strongly
+typed enums.
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> p = Pet("Lucy", Pet.Cat)
+    >>> p.type
+    Kind.Cat
+    >>> int(p.type)
+    1L
+
+The entries defined by the enumeration type are exposed in the ``__members__`` property:
+
+.. code-block:: pycon
+
+    >>> Pet.Kind.__members__
+    {'Dog': Kind.Dog, 'Cat': Kind.Cat}
+
+The ``name`` property returns the name of the enum value as a unicode string.
+
+.. note::
+
+    It is also possible to use ``str(enum)``, however these accomplish different
+    goals. The following shows how these two approaches differ.
+
+    .. code-block:: pycon
+
+        >>> p = Pet("Lucy", Pet.Cat)
+        >>> pet_type = p.type
+        >>> pet_type
+        Pet.Cat
+        >>> str(pet_type)
+        'Pet.Cat'
+        >>> pet_type.name
+        'Cat'
+
+.. note::
+
+    When the special tag ``py::arithmetic()`` is specified to the ``enum_``
+    constructor, pybind11 creates an enumeration that also supports rudimentary
+    arithmetic and bit-level operations like comparisons, and, or, xor, negation,
+    etc.
+
+    .. code-block:: cpp
+
+        py::enum_<Pet::Kind>(pet, "Kind", py::arithmetic())
+           ...
+
+    By default, these are omitted to conserve space.

xcoll/scattering_routines/geant4/collimasim/lib/pybind11/docs/cmake/index.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
+CMake helpers
+-------------
+
+Pybind11 can be used with ``add_subdirectory(extern/pybind11)``, or from an
+install with ``find_package(pybind11 CONFIG)``. The interface provided in
+either case is functionally identical.
+
+.. cmake-module:: ../../tools/pybind11Config.cmake.in