I'm new to Scala, and I'm running into this strange situation.
def bar[A, B](implicit foo: A => B): B = {
// do something
foo
}
And then I got error like
require B but found A => B
How should I get B form A => B
Here's the reason why I did this, I have two functions:
def funcA: String = {
def getStrA: String = "A"
// then there's the same operation in both functions
Try{ } match {
case Success(_) => getStrA
case Failure(_) => // exactlly same error handler in both function
}
}
def funcB: Int = {
def doSomething(x: Int): Int = {
// do something
x / 1
}
val x = 1
Try{ } match {
case Success(_) => doSomething(1)
case Failure(_) => // exactlly same error handler in both function
}
}
Here's what I want to achieve
def funcA: String = {
implicit def getStrA: String = "A"
bar
}
def funcB: Int = {
val x = 1
implicit def doSomething(x: Int): Int = {
// do something
x / 1
}
bar
}
def bar[A, B](implicit foo: A => B): B = {
Try{ } match {
case Success(_) => foo
case Failure(_) => // exactlly same error handler in both function
}
}
You have a conversion from A to B. You need to return B. The only way to do this is to pass A into the function. This signature has an implied assumption that you have some valid A value (most likely hardcoded) that you will always use here.
def bar[A, B](implicit foo: A => B): B = {
val a: A = ... // hmm...
foo(a)
}
Considering, that A is parametric, then you are either missing some information, or this A is impossible to create (it cannot be null because not all types can take null as a value), so you might need to throw exception in such case. Probably you are either missing some A provider or you should always fail this operation.
UPDATE:
There is no need for using implicits at all in your code:
def bar[B](f: onSuccess: A => B) =
Try{ some operations } match {
case Success(value) => onSuccess(value)
case Failure(_) => // error handler
}
def funcA = bar(_ => "A")
def funcB = bar(_ => 1)
Can I generate Scala code from a template (of sorts)?
I know how to do this in Racket/Scheme/Lisp, but not in Scala. Is this something Scala macros can do?
I want to have a code template where X varies. If I had this code template:
def funcX(a: ArgsX): Try[Seq[RowX]] =
w.getThing() match {
case Some(t: Thing) => w.wrap(t){Detail.funcX(t, a)}
case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException)
}
and tokens Apple and Orange, a macro would take my template, replace the Xs, and produce:
def funcApple(a: ArgsApple): Try[Seq[RowApple]] =
w.getThing() match {
case Some(t: Thing) => w.wrap(t){Detail.funcApple(t, a)}
case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException)
}
def funcOrange(a: ArgsOrange): Try[Seq[RowOrange]] =
w.getThing() match {
case Some(t: Thing) => w.wrap(t){Detail.funcOrange(t, a)}
case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException)
}
Try macro annotation with tree transformer
#compileTimeOnly("enable macro paradise")
class generate extends StaticAnnotation {
def macroTransform(annottees: Any*): Any = macro GenerateMacro.impl
}
object GenerateMacro {
def impl(c: whitebox.Context)(annottees: c.Tree*): c.Tree = {
import c.universe._
val trees = List("Apple", "Orange").map { s =>
val transformer = new Transformer {
override def transform(tree: Tree): Tree = tree match {
case q"$mods def $tname[..$tparams](...$paramss): $tpt = $expr" if tname.toString.contains("X") =>
val tname1 = TermName(tname.toString.replace("X", s))
val tparams1 = tparams.map(super.transform(_))
val paramss1 = paramss.map(_.map(super.transform(_)))
val tpt1 = super.transform(tpt)
val expr1 = super.transform(expr)
q"$mods def $tname1[..$tparams1](...$paramss1): $tpt1 = $expr1"
case q"${tname: TermName} " if tname.toString.contains("X") =>
val tname1 = TermName(tname.toString.replace("X", s))
q"$tname1"
case tq"${tpname: TypeName} " if tpname.toString.contains("X") =>
val tpname1 = TypeName(tpname.toString.replace("X", s))
tq"$tpname1"
case q"$expr.$tname " if tname.toString.contains("X") =>
val expr1 = super.transform(expr)
val tname1 = TermName(tname.toString.replace("X", s))
q"$expr1.$tname1"
case tq"$ref.$tpname " if tpname.toString.contains("X") =>
val ref1 = super.transform(ref)
val tpname1 = TypeName(tpname.toString.replace("X", s))
tq"$ref1.$tpname1"
case t => super.transform(t)
}
}
transformer.transform(annottees.head)
}
q"..$trees"
}
}
#generate
def funcX(a: ArgsX): Try[Seq[RowX]] =
w.getThing() match {
case Some(t: Thing) => w.wrap(t){Detail.funcX(t, a)}
case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException)
}
//Warning:scalac: {
// def funcApple(a: ArgsApple): Try[Seq[RowApple]] = w.getThing() match {
// case Some((t # (_: Thing))) => w.wrap(t)(Detail.funcApple(t, a))
// case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException())
// };
// def funcOrange(a: ArgsOrange): Try[Seq[RowOrange]] = w.getThing() match {
// case Some((t # (_: Thing))) => w.wrap(t)(Detail.funcOrange(t, a))
// case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException())
// };
// ()
//}
Also you can try approach with type class
def func[A <: Args](a: A)(implicit ar: ArgsRows[A]): Try[Seq[ar.R]] =
w.getThing() match {
case Some(t: Thing) => w.wrap(t){Detail.func(t, a)}
case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException)
}
trait ArgsRows[A <: Args] {
type R <: Row
}
object ArgsRows {
type Aux[A <: Args, R0 <: Row] = ArgsRows[A] { type R = R0 }
implicit val apple: Aux[ArgsApple, RowApple] = null
implicit val orange: Aux[ArgsOrange, RowOrange] = null
}
sealed trait Args
trait ArgsApple extends Args
trait ArgsOrange extends Args
trait Thing
sealed trait Row
trait RowApple extends Row
trait RowOrange extends Row
object Detail {
def func[A <: Args](t: Thing, a: A)(implicit ar: ArgsRows[A]): ar.R = ???
}
class MissingThingException extends Throwable
trait W {
def wrap[R <: Row](t: Thing)(r: R): Try[Seq[R]] = ???
def getThing(): Option[Thing] = ???
}
val w: W = ???
In my opinion, it looks like you could pass your funcX function as a higher-order function. You could also combine it with currying to make a "function factory":
def funcX[A](f: (Thing, A) => RowX)(a: A): Try[Seq[RowX]] =
w.getThing() match {
case Some(t: Thing) => w.wrap(t){f(t,a)}
case _ => Failure(new MissingThingException)
}
Then you could use it to create instances of funcApple or funcOrange:
val funcApple: ArgsApple => Try[Seq[RowX]] = funcX(Detail.funcApple)
val funcOrange: ArgsOrange => Try[Seq[RowX]] = funcX(Detail.funcOrange)
funcApple(argsApple)
funcOrange(argsOrange)
I assumed the signature of Detail.funcApple and Detail.funcOrange is similar to (Thing, X) => RowX, but of course you could use different.
You may not actually need macros to achieve this, you can use a pattern match a generic type like this:
import scala.util.Try
def funcX[A](input :A) :Try[Seq[String]] = input match {
case x :String => Success(List(s"Input is a string: $input, call Detail.funcApple"))
case x :Int => Success(List(s"Input is an int, call Detail.funcOrange"))
}
scala> funcX("apple")
res3: scala.util.Try[Seq[String]] = Success(List(Input is a string: apple, call Detail.funcApple))
scala> funcX(11)
res4: scala.util.Try[Seq[String]] = Success(List(Input is an int, call Detail.funcOrange))
def myMethod(myType: String) :Future[Future[Either[List[MyError], MyClass]]] {
for {
first <- runWithSeq(firstSource)
}
yield {
runWithSeq(secondSource)
.map {s ->
val mine = MyClass(s.head, lars)
val errors = myType match {
case "all" => Something.someMethod(mine)
}
(s, errors)
}
.map { x =>
x._2.leftMap(xs => {
addInfo(x._1.head, xs.toList)
}).toEither
}
}
}
for {
myStuff <- myMethod("something")
} yield {
myStuff.collect {
case(Left(errors), rowNumber) =>
MyCaseClass(errors, None) //compilation error here
}
}
I get compilation error on MyCaseClass that expected: List[MyError], found: Any
The signature of MyCaseClass is:
case class MyCaseClass(myErrors: List[ValidationError])
How can I fix this such that I can correctly call MyCaseClass inside the yield?
Your code example doesn't make much sense, and doesn't compile, but if runWithSeq() returns a Future then you should be able to eliminate the double Future return type like so.
for {
_ <- runWithSeq(firstSource)
scnd <- runWithSeq(secondSource)
} yield { ...
Your example is pretty hard to paste and fix
Abstact example for this
Class C may be whatever you want
def test(testval: Int)(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Future[Either[String, Int]]] = {
Future(Future{
if (testval % 2 == 0) Right(testval) else Left("Smth wrong")
})
}
implicit class FutureEitherExt[A, B](ft: Future[Either[A, B]]) {
def EitherMatch[C](f1: A => C, f2: B => C)(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[C] = {
ft.map {
case Left(value) => f1(value)
case Right(value) => f2(value)
}
}
}
val fl: Future[Either[String, Int]] = test(5).flatten
val result: Future[String] = fl.EitherMatch(identity, _.toString)
I have the following function and I would like to return Future[Boolean] but the IDE prompts that I return Unit. I am new in Scala. Can someone point me out what I am doing wrong?
def remove(loginInfo: LoginInfo): Future[Boolean] = {
val result = findObject(loginInfo)
result.onSuccess {
case Some(persistentPasswordInfo) =>
val removeResult = remove(persistentPasswordInfo._id.toString)
removeResult.map {
case Left(ex) => Future.successful(false)
case Right(b) => Future.successful(b)
}
case None => Future.successful(false)
}
}
Replace onSuccess with flatMap. Assuming your remove(x: String) method also returns a Future, that will also need to be flatMapped:
def remove(loginInfo: LoginInfo): Future[Boolean] = {
val result = findObject(loginInfo)
result.flatMap {
case Some(persistentPasswordInfo) =>
val removeResult = remove(persistentPasswordInfo._id.toString)
removeResult.flatMap {
case Left(ex) => Future.successful(false)
case Right(b) => Future.successful(b)
}
case None => Future.successful(false)
}
}
I have multiple Option's. I want to check if they hold a value. If an Option is None, I want to reply to user about this. Else proceed.
This is what I have done:
val name:Option[String]
val email:Option[String]
val pass:Option[String]
val i = List(name,email,pass).find(x => x match{
case None => true
case _ => false
})
i match{
case Some(x) => Ok("Bad Request")
case None => {
//move forward
}
}
Above I can replace find with contains, but this is a very dirty way. How can I make it elegant and monadic?
Edit: I would also like to know what element was None.
Another way is as a for-comprehension:
val outcome = for {
nm <- name
em <- email
pwd <- pass
result = doSomething(nm, em, pwd) // where def doSomething(name: String, email: String, password: String): ResultType = ???
} yield (result)
This will generate outcome as a Some(result), which you can interrogate in various ways (all the methods available to the collections classes: map, filter, foreach, etc.). Eg:
outcome.map(Ok(result)).orElse(Ok("Bad Request"))
val ok = Seq(name, email, pass).forall(_.isDefined)
If you want to reuse the code, you can do
def allFieldValueProvided(fields: Option[_]*): Boolean = fields.forall(_.isDefined)
If you want to know all the missing values then you can find all missing values and if there is none, then you are good to go.
def findMissingValues(v: (String, Option[_])*) = v.collect {
case (name, None) => name
}
val missingValues = findMissingValues(("name1", option1), ("name2", option2), ...)
if(missingValues.isEmpty) {
Ok(...)
} else {
BadRequest("Missing values for " + missingValues.mkString(", ")))
}
val response = for {
n <- name
e <- email
p <- pass
} yield {
/* do something with n, e, p */
}
response getOrElse { /* bad request /* }
Or, with Scalaz:
val response = (name |#| email |#| pass) { (n, e, p) =>
/* do something with n, e, p */
}
response getOrElse { /* bad request /* }
if ((name :: email :: pass :: Nil) forall(!_.isEmpty)) {
} else {
// bad request
}
I think the most straightforward way would be this:
(name,email,pass) match {
case ((Some(name), Some(email), Some(pass)) => // proceed
case _ => // Bad request
}
A version with stone knives and bear skins:
import util._
object Test extends App {
val zero: Either[List[Int], Tuple3[String,String,String]] = Right((null,null,null))
def verify(fields: List[Option[String]]) = {
(zero /: fields.zipWithIndex) { (acc, v) => v match {
case (Some(s), i) => acc match {
case Left(_) => acc
case Right(t) =>
val u = i match {
case 0 => t copy (_1 = s)
case 1 => t copy (_2 = s)
case 2 => t copy (_3 = s)
}
Right(u)
}
case (None, i) =>
val fails = acc match {
case Left(f) => f
case Right(_) => Nil
}
Left(i :: fails)
}
}
}
def consume(name: String, email: String, pass: String) = Console println s"$name/$email/$pass"
def fail(is: List[Int]) = is map List("name","email","pass") foreach (Console println "Missing: " + _)
val name:Option[String] = Some("Bob")
val email:Option[String]= None
val pass:Option[String] = Some("boB")
val res = verify(List(name,email,pass))
res.fold(fail, (consume _).tupled)
val res2 = verify(List(name, Some("bob#bob.org"),pass))
res2.fold(fail, (consume _).tupled)
}
The same thing, using reflection to generalize the tuple copy.
The downside is that you must tell it what tuple to expect back. In this form, reflection is like one of those Stone Age advances that were so magical they trended on twitter for ten thousand years.
def verify[A <: Product](fields: List[Option[String]]) = {
import scala.reflect.runtime._
import universe._
val MaxTupleArity = 22
def tuple = {
require (fields.length <= MaxTupleArity)
val n = fields.length
val tupleN = typeOf[Tuple2[_,_]].typeSymbol.owner.typeSignature member TypeName(s"Tuple$n")
val init = tupleN.typeSignature member nme.CONSTRUCTOR
val ctor = currentMirror reflectClass tupleN.asClass reflectConstructor init.asMethod
val vs = Seq.fill(n)(null.asInstanceOf[String])
ctor(vs: _*).asInstanceOf[Product]
}
def zero: Either[List[Int], Product] = Right(tuple)
def nextProduct(p: Product, i: Int, s: String) = {
val im = currentMirror reflect p
val ts = im.symbol.typeSignature
val copy = (ts member TermName("copy")).asMethod
val args = copy.paramss.flatten map { x =>
val name = TermName(s"_$i")
if (x.name == name) s
else (im reflectMethod (ts member x.name).asMethod)()
}
(im reflectMethod copy)(args: _*).asInstanceOf[Product]
}
(zero /: fields.zipWithIndex) { (acc, v) => v match {
case (Some(s), i) => acc match {
case Left(_) => acc
case Right(t) => Right(nextProduct(t, i + 1, s))
}
case (None, i) =>
val fails = acc match {
case Left(f) => f
case Right(_) => Nil
}
Left(i :: fails)
}
}.asInstanceOf[Either[List[Int], A]]
}
def consume(name: String, email: String, pass: String) = Console println s"$name/$email/$pass"
def fail(is: List[Int]) = is map List("name","email","pass") foreach (Console println "Missing: " + _)
val name:Option[String] = Some("Bob")
val email:Option[String]= None
val pass:Option[String] = Some("boB")
type T3 = Tuple3[String,String,String]
val res = verify[T3](List(name,email,pass))
res.fold(fail, (consume _).tupled)
val res2 = verify[T3](List(name, Some("bob#bob.org"),pass))
res2.fold(fail, (consume _).tupled)
I know this doesn't scale well, but would this suffice?
(name, email, pass) match {
case (None, _, _) => "name"
case (_, None, _) => "email"
case (_, _, None) => "pass"
case _ => "Nothing to see here"
}