Title: Is it possible to modify Django Q() objects after construction?
Tags: python;django;django-orm;django-q
Question: Is it possible to modify Django Q() objects after construction?  I create a Q() object like so:

```q = Q(foo=1)
```

is it possible to later change ```q``` to be the same as if I had constructed:

```q2 = Q(foo=1, bar=2)
```

?  There's no mention of such an interface in the Django docs that I could find.

I was looking for something like:

```Q.append_clause(bar=2)
```

Comment: what exactly do you mean by "same as constructed"? do you mean modify the q object on the fly ?

Comment: Ok. the PerrinHarkins' answer is what you are looking for then.

Comment: @karthikr: Updated question to better describe what I was looking for.


Here is another answer: You can just make another Q() object and AND them together:
```q2 = q &amp; Q(bar=2)```

Comment for this answer: Yes, they are identical. What matters is if there are two .filter calls or just one.
Comment for this answer: Are you sure that's semantically identical?  It may well be, but I know there can be gotchas.  For instance, calling `.filter(Q(parent__foo=1)).filter(Q(parent__bar=1))` is different than `.filter(Q(parent__foo=1, parent__bar=1))` and I didn't want to fall afoul of anything like that.

Here is another answer: You can add Q objects together, using their ```add``` method. For example:

```&gt;&gt;&gt; q = Q(sender=x)
&gt;&gt;&gt; q.add(Q(receiver=y), Q.AND)
```

The second argument to ```add``` is the connector, which can also be ```Q.OR```

EDIT: My answer is merely a different way of doing what Perrin Harkins suggested, but regarding your other concern, about different behavior of ```filter``` depending on the way you construct the query, you don't have to worry about that if you join Q objects. My example is equivalent to ```filter(sender=x, receiver=y)```, and not ```filter(sender=x).filter(receiver=y)```, because Q objects, as far as I could see in a quick test, do an immediate AND on the clauses and don't have the special behavior of ```filter``` for multi-valued relations.

In any case, nothing like looking at the SQL and making sure it really is doing the same in your specific queries.


Here is another answer: The answers here are a little old and unsatisfactory imo. So here is my answer
This is how you deep copy:
```def deep_copy(q: Q) -&gt; Q:
    new_q = Q()
    # Go through the children of a query: if it's another
    # query it will run this function recursively
    for sub_q in q.children:
        # Make sure you copy the connector in 
        # case of complicated queries
        new_q.connector = q.connector
        if isinstance(sub_q, Q):
            # This will run recursively on sub queries
            sub_q = get_employee_q(sub_q)
        else:
            pass # Do your modification here
        new_q.children.append(sub_q)
    return new_q
```
In the else condition is where your stuff (```name='nathan'``` for example) is defined. You can change or delete that if you'd like and the Query should work fine.


{'source': 'StackExchangeDataset', 'subset': 'stackoverflow.com', 'metadata': {'AnswerCount': 3, 'CommentCount': 3, 'ContentLicense': 'CC BY-SA 3.0', 'CreationDate': '2014:00:09/03/14', 'FavoriteCount': 3.0, 'PostTypeId': 1, 'Tags': '<python><django><django-orm><django-q>', 'Title': 'Is it possible to modify Django Q() objects after construction?', 'ViewCount': 444, 'id': 25646642, 'user_AboutMe': '<p>I want what everybody wants.  A job where I can change the world modestly for the better, that makes me enough money so I can have everything I want and not so much that my kids want to kill me for the inheritance, and that gives me enough fame to stroke my ego yet I can still dine out in peace.</p>\n', 'user_AccountId': 84908.0, 'user_DisplayName': 'Scott Stafford', 'user_Reputation': 42357.0, 'user_Views': 2999.0, 'user_id': 237091.0}}