dictionary_switches / src / Observer.rst

Full commit


Decoupling code behavior

Observer, and a category of callbacks called "multiple dispatching (not in Design Patterns)" including the Visitor from Design Patterns. Like the other forms of callback, this contains a hook point where you can change code. The difference is in the observer's completely dynamic nature. It is often used for the specific case of changes based on other object's change of state, but is also the basis of event management. Anytime you want to decouple the source of the call from the called code in a completely dynamic way.

The observer pattern solves a fairly common problem: What if a group of objects needs to update themselves when some object changes state? This can be seen in the "model-view" aspect of Smalltalk's MVC (model-view-controller), or the almost-equivalent "Document-View Architecture." Suppose that you have some data (the "document") and more than one view, say a plot and a textual view. When you change the data, the two views must know to update themselves, and that's what the observer facilitates. It's a common enough problem that its solution has been made a part of the standard java.util library.

There are two types of objects used to implement the observer pattern in Python. The Observable class keeps track of everybody who wants to be informed when a change happens, whether the "state" has changed or not. When someone says "OK, everybody should check and potentially update themselves," the Observable class performs this task by calling the notifyObservers( ) method for each one on the list. The notifyObservers( ) method is part of the base class Observable.

There are actually two "things that change" in the observer pattern: the quantity of observing objects and the way an update occurs. That is, the observer pattern allows you to modify both of these without affecting the surrounding code.

Observer is an "interface" class that only has one member function, update( ). This function is called by the object that's being observed, when that object decides its time to update all its observers. The arguments are optional; you could have an update( ) with no arguments and that would still fit the observer pattern; however this is more general-it allows the observed object to pass the object that caused the update (since an Observer may be registered with more than one observed object) and any extra information if that's helpful, rather than forcing the Observer object to hunt around to see who is updating and to fetch any other information it needs.

The "observed object" that decides when and how to do the updating will be called the Observable.

Observable has a flag to indicate whether it's been changed. In a simpler design, there would be no flag; if something happened, everyone would be notified. The flag allows you to wait, and only notify the Observers when you decide the time is right. Notice, however, that the control of the flag's state is protected, so that only an inheritor can decide what constitutes a change, and not the end user of the resulting derived Observer class.

Most of the work is done in notifyObservers( ). If the changed flag has not been set, this does nothing. Otherwise, it first clears the changed flag so repeated calls to notifyObservers( ) won't waste time. This is done before notifying the observers in case the calls to update( ) do anything that causes a change back to this Observable object. Then it moves through the set and calls back to the update( ) member function of each Observer.

At first it may appear that you can use an ordinary Observable object to manage the updates. But this doesn't work; to get an effect, you must inherit from Observable and somewhere in your derived-class code call setChanged( ). This is the member function that sets the "changed" flag, which means that when you call notifyObservers( ) all of the observers will, in fact, get notified. Where you call setChanged( ) depends on the logic of your program.

Observing Flowers

Since Python doesn't have standard library components to support the observer pattern (like Java does), we must first create one. The simplest thing to do is translate the Java standard library Observer and Observable classes. This also provides easier translation from Java code that uses these libraries.

In trying to do this, we encounter a minor snag, which is the fact that Java has a synchronized keyword that provides built-in support for thread synchronization. We could certainly accomplish the same thing by hand, using code like this:

# Util/

import threading
class ToSynch:
    def __init__(self):
        self.mutex = threading.RLock()
        self.val = 1
    def aSynchronizedMethod(self):
            self.val += 1
            return self.val

But this rapidly becomes tedious to write and to read. Peter Norvig provided me with a much nicer solution:

# Util/
'''Simple emulation of Java's 'synchronized'
keyword, from Peter Norvig.'''
import threading

def synchronized(method):
    def f(*args):
        self = args[0]
        # print(method.__name__, 'acquired')
            return apply(method, args)
            # print(method.__name__, 'released')
    return f

def synchronize(klass, names=None):
    """Synchronize methods in the given class.
    Only synchronize the methods whose names are
    given, or all methods if names=None."""
    if type(names)==type(''): names = names.split()
    for (name, val) in klass.__dict__.items():
        if callable(val) and name != '__init__' and \
          (names == None or name in names):
            # print("synchronizing", name)
            klass.__dict__[name] = synchronized(val)

# You can create your own self.mutex, or inherit
# from this class:
class Synchronization:
    def __init__(self):
        self.mutex = threading.RLock()

The synchronized( ) function takes a method and wraps it in a function that adds the mutex functionality. The method is called inside this function:

return apply(method, args)

and as the return statement passes through the finally clause, the mutex is released.

This is in some ways the Decorator design pattern, but much simpler to create and use. All you have to say is:

myMethod = synchronized(myMethod)

To surround your method with a mutex.

synchronize( ) is a convenience function that applies synchronized( ) to an entire class, either all the methods in the class (the default) or selected methods which are named in a string as the second argument.

Finally, for synchronized( ) to work there must be a self.mutex created in every class that uses synchronized( ). This can be created by hand by the class author, but it's more consistent to use inheritance, so the base class Synchronization is provided.

Here's a simple test of the Synchronization module:

# Util/
from Synchronization import *

# To use for a method:
class C(Synchronization):
    def __init__(self):
        Synchronization.__init__(self) = 1
    def m(self): += 1
    m = synchronized(m)
    def f(self): return 47
    def g(self): return 'spam'

# So m is synchronized, f and g are not.
c = C()

# On the class level:
class D(C):
    def __init__(self):
    # You must override an un-synchronized method
    # in order to synchronize it (just like Java):
    def f(self): C.f(self)

# Synchronize every (defined) method in the class:
d = D()
d.f() # Synchronized
d.g() # Not synchronized
d.m() # Synchronized (in the base class)

class E(C):
    def __init__(self):
    def m(self): C.m(self)
    def g(self): C.g(self)
    def f(self): C.f(self)
# Only synchronizes m and g. Note that m ends up
# being doubly-wrapped in synchronization, which
# doesn't hurt anything but is inefficient:
synchronize(E, 'm g')
e = E()

You must call the base class constructor for Synchronization, but that's all. In class C you can see the use of synchronized( ) for m, leaving f and g alone. Class D has all its methods synchronized en masse, and class E uses the convenience function to synchronize m and g. Note that since m ends up being synchronized twice, it will be entered and left twice for every call, which isn't very desirable [there may be a fix for this]:

# Util/
# Class support for "observer" pattern.
from Synchronization import *

class Observer:
    def update(observable, arg):
        '''Called when the observed object is
        modified. You call an Observable object's
        notifyObservers method to notify all the
        object's observers of the change.'''

class Observable(Synchronization):
    def __init__(self):
        self.obs = []
        self.changed = 0

    def addObserver(self, observer):
        if observer not in self.obs:

    def deleteObserver(self, observer):

    def notifyObservers(self, arg = None):
        '''If 'changed' indicates that this object
        has changed, notify all its observers, then
        call clearChanged(). Each observer has its
        update() called with two arguments: this
        observable object and the generic 'arg'.'''

            if not self.changed: return
            # Make a local copy in case of synchronous
            # additions of observers:
            localArray = self.obs[:]
        # Updating is not required to be synchronized:
        for observer in localArray:
            observer.update(self, arg)

    def deleteObservers(self): self.obs = []
    def setChanged(self): self.changed = 1
    def clearChanged(self): self.changed = 0
    def hasChanged(self): return self.changed
    def countObservers(self): return len(self.obs)

  "addObserver deleteObserver deleteObservers " +
  "setChanged clearChanged hasChanged " +

Using this library, here is an example of the observer pattern:

# Observer/
# Demonstration of "observer" pattern.
import sys
sys.path += ['../util']
from Observer import Observer, Observable

class Flower:
    def __init__(self):
        self.isOpen = 0
        self.openNotifier = Flower.OpenNotifier(self)
        self.closeNotifier= Flower.CloseNotifier(self)
    def open(self): # Opens its petals
        self.isOpen = 1
    def close(self): # Closes its petals
        self.isOpen = 0
    def closing(self): return self.closeNotifier

    class OpenNotifier(Observable):
        def __init__(self, outer):
            self.outer = outer
            self.alreadyOpen = 0
        def notifyObservers(self):
            if self.outer.isOpen and \
            not self.alreadyOpen:
                self.alreadyOpen = 1
        def close(self):
            self.alreadyOpen = 0

    class CloseNotifier(Observable):
        def __init__(self, outer):
            self.outer = outer
            self.alreadyClosed = 0
        def notifyObservers(self):
            if not self.outer.isOpen and \
            not self.alreadyClosed:
                self.alreadyClosed = 1
        def open(self):
            alreadyClosed = 0

class Bee:
    def __init__(self, name): = name
        self.openObserver = Bee.OpenObserver(self)
        self.closeObserver = Bee.CloseObserver(self)
    # An inner class for observing openings:
    class OpenObserver(Observer):
        def __init__(self, outer):
            self.outer = outer
        def update(self, observable, arg):
            print("Bee " + + \)
              "'s breakfast time!"
    # Another inner class for closings:
    class CloseObserver(Observer):
        def __init__(self, outer):
            self.outer = outer
        def update(self, observable, arg):
            print("Bee " + + \)
              "'s bed time!"

class Hummingbird:
    def __init__(self, name): = name
        self.openObserver = \
        self.closeObserver = \
    class OpenObserver(Observer):
        def __init__(self, outer):
            self.outer = outer
        def update(self, observable, arg):
            print("Hummingbird " + + \
              "'s breakfast time!")
    class CloseObserver(Observer):
        def __init__(self, outer):
            self.outer = outer
        def update(self, observable, arg):
            print("Hummingbird " + + \
              "'s bed time!")

f = Flower()
ba = Bee("Eric")
bb = Bee("Eric 0.5")
ha = Hummingbird("A")
hb = Hummingbird("B")
# Hummingbird 2 decides to sleep in:
# A change that interests observers: # It's already open, no change.
# Bee 1 doesn't want to go to bed:
f.close() # It's already closed; no change

The events of interest are that a Flower can open or close. Because of the use of the inner class idiom, both these events can be separately observable phenomena. OpenNotifier and CloseNotifier both inherit Observable, so they have access to setChanged( ) and can be handed to anything that needs an Observable.

The inner class idiom also comes in handy to define more than one kind of Observer, in Bee and Hummingbird, since both those classes may want to independently observe Flower openings and closings. Notice how the inner class idiom provides something that has most of the benefits of inheritance (the ability to access the private data in the outer class, for example) without the same restrictions.

In main( ), you can see one of the prime benefits of the observer pattern: the ability to change behavior at run time by dynamically registering and un- registering Observers with Observables.

If you study the code above you'll see that OpenNotifier and CloseNotifier use the basic Observable interface. This means that you could inherit other completely different Observer classes; the only connection the Observers have with Flowers is the Observer interface.

A Visual Example of Observers

The following example is similar to the ColorBoxes example from Thinking in Java. Boxes are placed in a grid on the screen and each one is initialized to a random color. In addition, each box implements the Observer interface and is registered with an Observable object. When you click on a box, all of the other boxes are notified that a change has been made because the Observable object automatically calls each Observer object's update( ) method. Inside this method, the box checks to see if it's adjacent to the one that was clicked, and if so it changes its color to match the clicked box. (NOTE: this example has not been converted. See further down for a version that has the GUI but not the Observers, in PythonCard.):

# Observer/
# Demonstration of Observer pattern using
# Java's built-in observer classes.

# You must inherit a type of Observable:
class BoxObservable(Observable):
    def notifyObservers(self, Object b):
        # Otherwise it won't propagate changes:

class BoxObserver(JFrame):
    Observable notifier = BoxObservable()
    def __init__(self, grid):
        setTitle("Demonstrates Observer pattern")
        Container cp = getContentPane()
        cp.setLayout(GridLayout(grid, grid))
        for(int x = 0 x < grid x++)
            for(int y = 0 y < grid y++)
                cp.add(OCBox(x, y, notifier))

    def main(self, String[] args):
        grid = 8
            if(args.length > 0)
                grid = Integer.parseInt(args[0])
            JFrame f = BoxObserver(grid)
            f.setSize(500, 400)
            # JDK 1.3:
            # Add a WindowAdapter if you have JDK 1.2

class OCBox(JPanel) implements Observer:
    Color cColor = newColor()
    colors = [,, Color.cyan,
      Color.darkGray, Color.gray,,
      Color.lightGray, Color.magenta,,,,
      Color.white, Color.yellow
    def newColor():
        return colors[
          (int)(Math.random() * colors.length)

    def __init__(self, x, y, Observable notifier):
        self.x = x
        self.y = y
        self.notifier = notifier

    def paintComponent(self, Graphics g):
        Dimension s = getSize()
        g.fillRect(0, 0, s.width, s.height)

    class ML(MouseAdapter):
        def mousePressed(self, MouseEvent e):

    def update(self, Observable o, Object arg):
        OCBox clicked = (OCBox)arg
            cColor = clicked.cColor

    def nextTo(OCBox b):
        return Math.abs(x - b.x) <= 1 &&
            Math.abs(y - b.y) <= 1

When you first look at the online documentation for Observable, it's a bit confusing because it appears that you can use an ordinary Observable object to manage the updates. But this doesn't work; try it-inside BoxObserver, create an Observable object instead of a BoxObservable object and see what happens: nothing. To get an effect, you must inherit from Observable and somewhere in your derived-class code call setChanged( ). This is the method that sets the "changed" flag, which means that when you call notifyObservers( ) all of the observers will, in fact, get notified. In the example above setChanged( ) is simply called within notifyObservers( ), but you could use any criterion you want to decide when to call setChanged( ).

BoxObserver contains a single Observable object called notifier, and every time an OCBox object is created, it is tied to notifier. In OCBox, whenever you click the mouse the notifyObservers( ) method is called, passing the clicked object in as an argument so that all the boxes receiving the message (in their update( ) method) know who was clicked and can decide whether to change themselves or not. Using a combination of code in notifyObservers( ) and update( ) you can work out some fairly complex schemes.

It might appear that the way the observers are notified must be frozen at compile time in the notifyObservers( ) method. However, if you look more closely at the code above you'll see that the only place in BoxObserver or OCBox where you're aware that you're working with a BoxObservable is at the point of creation of the Observable object-from then on everything uses the basic Observable interface. This means that you could inherit other Observable classes and swap them at run time if you want to change notification behavior then.

Here is a version of the above that doesn't use the Observer pattern, written by Kevin Altis using PythonCard, and placed here as a starting point for a translation that does include Observer:

# Observer/
""" Written by Kevin Altis as a first-cut for
converting BoxObserver to Python. The Observer
hasn't been integrated yet.
To run this program, you must:
Install WxPython from
Install PythonCard. See:
from PythonCardPrototype import log, model
import random

GRID = 8

class ColorBoxesTest(model.Background):
    def on_openBackground(self, event):
        self.document = []
        for row in range(GRID):
            line = []
            for column in range(GRID):
                line.append(self.createBox(row, column))
    def createBox(self, row, column):
        colors = ['black', 'blue', 'cyan',
        'darkGray', 'gray', 'green',
        'lightGray', 'magenta',
        'orange', 'pink', 'red',
        'white', 'yellow']
        width, height = self.panel.GetSizeTuple()
        boxWidth = width / GRID
        boxHeight = height / GRID"width:" + str(width) +
          " height:" + str(height))"boxWidth:" + str(boxWidth) +
          " boxHeight:" + str(boxHeight))
        # use an empty image, though some other
        # widgets would work just as well
        boxDesc = {'type':'Image',
          'size':(boxWidth, boxHeight), 'file':''}
        name = 'box-%d-%d' % (row, column)
        # There is probably a 1 off error in the
        # calculation below since the boxes should
        # probably have a slightly different offset
        # to prevent overlaps
        boxDesc['position'] = \
          (column * boxWidth, row * boxHeight)
        boxDesc['name'] = name
        boxDesc['backgroundColor'] = \
        self.components[name] =  boxDesc
        return self.components[name]

    def changeNeighbors(self, row, column, color):

        # This algorithm will result in changing the
        # color of some boxes more than once, so an
        # OOP solution where only neighbors are asked
        # to change or boxes check to see if they are
        # neighbors before changing would be better
        # per the original example does the whole grid
        # need to change its state at once like in a
        # Life program? should the color change
        # in the propogation of another notification
        # event?

        for r in range(max(0, row - 1),
                       min(GRID, row + 2)):
            for c in range(max(0, column - 1),
                           min(GRID, column + 2)):

    # this is a background handler, so it isn't
    # specific to a single widget. Image widgets
    # don't have a mouseClick event (wxCommandEvent
    # in wxPython)
    def on_mouseUp(self, event):
        target =
        prefix, row, column ='-')
        self.changeNeighbors(int(row), int(column),

if __name__ == '__main__':
    app = model.PythonCardApp(ColorBoxesTest)

This is the resource file for running the program (see PythonCard for details):

# Observer/
    'backgrounds': [
      { 'type':'Background',
        'title':'Demonstrates Observer pattern',
        'position':(5, 5),
        'size':(500, 400),
        'components': [

] # end components
} # end background
] # end backgrounds
} }


  1. Using the approach in, create a tool that will automatically wrap all the methods in a class to provide an execution trace, so that you can see the name of the method and when it is entered and exited.
  2. Create a minimal Observer-Observable design in two classes. Just create the bare minimum in the two classes, then demonstrate your design by creating one Observable and many Observers, and cause the Observable to update the Observers.
  3. Modify to turn it into a simple game. If any of the squares surrounding the one you clicked is part of a contiguous patch of the same color, then all the squares in that patch are changed to the color you clicked on. You can configure the game for competition between players or to keep track of the number of clicks that a single player uses to turn the field into a single color. You may also want to restrict a player's color to the first one that was chosen.