I have a trait
trait Weight {
def getWeight: Int
}
Multiple classes inherits it, example:
case class Test(n: Int) extends Weight {
override def getWeight: Int = n
}
Now i want to add sorting ability to all Weight subclasses. I added Ordered to Weight:
trait Weight extends Ordered[Weight] {
def getWeight: Int
override def compare(that: Weight): Int = this.getWeight.compareTo(that.getWeight)
}
Try sorting:
val seq = Seq(Test(1), Test(4), Test(3), Test(2))
seq.sorted // error
And it's not compiles:
Error:(74, 6) diverging implicit expansion for type
scala.math.Ordering[A$A254.this.Test] starting with method $conforms
in object Predef seq.sorted;}
^
Whats i am doing wrong?
Another solution a bit different than mdm. Since sorted takes an implicit of Ordering, you can do the following:
seq.sorted(Ordering[Weight])
Your solution does not work because Ordered[T] is invariant in T, meaning that Ordered[Weight] has no relationship with Ordered[A]. You would need to specify that in the sub-classes.
You could use an implicit Ordering rather than an Ordered.
trait Weight{
def getWeight : Int
}
object Weight{
implicit def ordering[T <: Weight] : Ordering[T] = Ordering.by(w => w.getWeight)
}
case class A(w : Int) extends Weight{
def getWeight = w
}
case class B(w : Int) extends Weight{
def getWeight = w
}
import Weight._
Seq(A(1),B(2),B(0),A(3),A(-3)).sorted
Will result in:
List(A(-3), B(0), A(1), B(2), A(3))
Note that this solution relies on an Ordering[Int] to be available (which is, by default).
Related
What I need is, let say, I have a List trait, and Value trait, and special lists store special Value types. I tried this, but line.value doesn't exist, and the reason is, it looks like prepend's type parameter is not the actual SingleValue class, but it is still a template. But why? thanks
sealed trait Value
case class SingleValue(value: Int) extends Value
case class DoubleValue(value1: Int, value2: Int) extends Value
trait List1 {
def prepend[B <: Value](value: B): Int
}
case class SingleList1 extends List1 {
def prepend[SingleValue](line: SingleValue): Int = {
line.value
}
}
SingleValue in def prepend[SingleValue](line: SingleValue) is a type parameter, not a concrete type.
Like when you wrote def prepend[B <: Value](value: B): Int, you used B as a variable def prepend[SingleValue] has exactly the same meaning (except that variable name is different, but that's immaterial).
It is not very clear from your question what exactly you are trying to do here ... but, if I am guessing correctly, you want to parametrize the class, not the method:
trait List1[B <: Value] {
def prepend(b: B): Int
}
class SingleList extends List1[SingleValue] {
def prepend(sv: SingleValue) = sv.value
}
Update So, if you want your List1 to be covariant, as you mentioned in the comment, that won't work: if it did, then SingleList would be a subclass of List1[Value], and therefore prepend would have to work with any Value, not just SingleValue, and it doesn't know how.
What you could do in that case, is define the specialized prepend method "on the side" and associate it with List1 via an implicit conversion:
trait Lis1[+B <: Value]
object List1Ops {
implicit class SVL[T <: SingleValue](val l: List1[T]) extends AnyVal {
def prepend(v: T) = v.value
}
}
This let's you do both things like:
val svl = new List1[SingleValue]{}
println(svl.prepend(new SingleValue))
and
val l: List1[Value] = new List1[SingleValue]{} // still covariant
Is that what you are after?
I'm trying to make a typeclass that depends on user input. Imagine we have some case objects:
sealed trait H
case object Ha extends H
case object Hb extends H
and the type class:
trait Foo[A] {
def bar: String
}
object Foo {
def bar[A : Foo] = implicitly[Foo[A]].bar
implicit object FooA extends Foo[Ha.type] {
override def bar: String = "A"
}
implicit object FooB extends Foo[Hb.type] {
override def bar: String = "B"
}
}
While I found a working solution using a match:
variableComingFromMainArgs match {
case "a" => Foo.bar[Ha.type] _
case "b" => Foo.bar[Hb.type] _
}
I remember that we have abstract types in Scala, so I could change my case class into:
sealed trait H {
type T <: H
}
case object Ha extends H {
type T = this.type
}
case object Hb extends H {
type T = this.type
}
Now, when depending on user input to the program, I could do something like
val variable = Ha
println(Foo.bar[variable.T])
However, for some reason this doesn't work the and the error is not very useful for me:
error: could not find implicit value for evidence parameter of type Foo[variable.T]
println(Foo.bar[variable.T])
Any ideas if this can be overcome, if not, why?
Thanks.
Implicits are compile time constructs so in principle they cannot depend on user input directly (programmer can wire it for example with pattern matching as you did).
Consider the following code. It compiles and works as intended:
trait H {
type A
}
case object Ha extends H {
override type A = Int
}
case object Hb extends H {
override type A = Long
}
trait Adder[T] {
def add(a: T, b: T): T
}
implicit object IntAdder extends Adder[Int] {
override def add(a: Int, b: Int): Int = a + b
}
implicit object LongAdder extends Adder[Long] {
override def add(a: Long, b: Long): Long = a + b
}
def addWithAdder(input: H)(a: input.A, b: input.A)(implicit ev: Adder[input.A]): input.A = ev.add(a, b)
val x: Int = addWithAdder(Ha)(3, 4)
val y: Long = addWithAdder(Hb)(3, 4)
Let's focus on addWithAdder method. Thanks to path dependent types compiler can choose correct implicit for this task. But still this method is basically the same as the following:
def add[T](a: T, b: T)(implicit ev: Adder[T]) = ev.add(a, b)
The only advantage first one can have is that you can provide all instances yourself and stop the user of your code to add own types (when H is sealed and all implementations are final).
Let's say I have the following code for value classes:
class Meters(val x: Int) extends AnyVal {
def +(m: Meters): Meters = new Meters(x + m.x)
}
class Seconds(val x: Int) extends AnyVal {
def +(s: Seconds): Seconds = new Seconds(x + s.x)
}
Is there any way for me to remove duplication of the "+" methods?
Something kind of like:
abstract class Units[T <: Units[T]](val x: Int) extends AnyVal {
def +(other: T): T = T(x + other.x)
}
Except I can't inherit from value classes, and I definitely can't use T like a constructor.
You can use a universal trait with a type class, lets start defining the trait.
trait Sum[T <: Sum[T]] extends Any {
val x: Int
def +(other: T)(implicit evidence : FromInt[T]): T = evidence.fromInt(x + other.x)
}
Now we need a type class that tell us how to go from an integer to some type, lets define this and call it FromInt
trait FromInt[T] {
def fromInt(x: Int) : T
}
now lets define the Meters value class which is as simple as
class Meters(val x :Int) extends AnyVal with Sum[Meters]
and in the companion object we can provide an implicit value of the type class we defined.
object Meters{
implicit val intConstructable : FromInt[Meters] = new FromInt[Meters] {
override def fromInt(x: Int) = new Meters(x)
}
}
and now we can just do
val added = new Meters(2) + new Meters(3)
println(added.x)
I have a trait called Mutatable that spits out a modified copy of an implementing class. I also have a trait I'd like to stack on top of it called CostedMutatable that keeps track of the cost of doing so. The method applyMutation returns an Option, as later I'd like to return None in cases where a particular mutation doesn't apply.
A simple version that just works on Ints (and "mutates" them by adding in new numbers) is shown below:
trait Mutatable[M] {
def applyMutation(mut : M) : Option[this.type]
}
trait CostedMutatable[M] extends Mutatable[M]{
var cost : Int = _
def getCostFor(mut : M): Int
abstract override def applyMutation(mut : M) : Option[this.type] = {
cost += getCostFor(mut)
applyMutation(mut)
}
}
object Example extends App {
case class Mutation(x: Int)
class Test(s: Int) extends Mutatable[Mutation] {
val start = s
override def applyMutation(mut: Mutation): Option[Test]
= Some(new Test(s+mut.x))
}
class CostTest(s: Int) extends Test(s) with CostedMutatable[Mutation] {
override def getCostFor(mut: Mutation): Int = 2
}
val testCost = new CostTest(5).cost
}
The problem is, this won't compile. I get the following error on compilation:
Error:(23, 18) overriding method applyMutation in trait Mutatable of type (mut: Example.Mutation)Option[Test.this.type];
method applyMutation has incompatible type
override def applyMutation(mut: Mutation): Option[Test] = Some(new Test(s+mut.x))
^
Aside from the compiler error, one other question comes to mind: am I even approaching this the right way? Should I be using F-bounded types instead? (I'll need each new implementing class to return a new copy of the concrete implementing class from applyMutation.)
Thanks in advance.
this.type is a type the only instances of which are this and Nothing. When a method returns this.type, the only allowed return value is this. In class Test applyMutation doesn't return this, but rather a completely new Test, which isn't an instance of this.type. This is why the code does not type-check.
I think what you are really trying to do is declare that applyMutation returns a value of the same class as this. Doing this does indeed require F-Bounded polymorphism. Here is a rewritten version of your code:
trait CostedMutatable[+A <: CostedMutatable[A, M], M] extends Mutatable[A, M] {
var cost : Int = _
def getCostFor(mut : M): Int
abstract override def applyMutation(mut: M): Option[A] = {
cost += getCostFor(mut)
super.applyMutation(mut)
}
}
object Example extends App {
case class Mutation(x: Int)
class Test(s: Int) extends Mutatable[Test, Mutation] {
val start = s
override def applyMutation(mut: Mutation): Option[Test]
= Some(new Test(s+mut.x))
}
class CostTest(s: Int) extends Test(s) with CostedMutatable[CostTest, Mutation] {
override def getCostFor(mut: Mutation): Int = 2
}
val testCost = new CostTest(5).cost
}
The following code shows a shallow hierarchy where a type representing a generic binary operation is used to substantiate a parameterized abstract type in another shallow container hierarchy:
trait BinaryOp[A] extends ((A,A) => A)
trait Plus[A] extends BinaryOp[A]
trait Minus[A] extends BinaryOp[A]
trait BaseOps {
type T[A] <: BinaryOp[A]
def apply[B](one: B, two: B)(op: T[B]) = op(one, two)
}
case object PlusOp extends BaseOps {
override type T[A] = Plus[A]
}
case object MinusOp extends BaseOps {
override type T[A] = Minus[A]
}
object App {
val plus = new Plus[Int] {
def apply(i: Int, i2: Int) = i + i2
}
def main(a: Array[String]) {
val exp = Expr(PlusOp)
exp.bo(1,2)(plus)
}
}
The idea is to be able to state an operation that may be valid for many different types up front, without being tied to a type-specific operation. If I define an expression class generically, all is well
case class Expr[T <: BaseOps](bo: T = PlusOp)
However for my use case it is undesirable for Expr to to be paremeterized:
case class Expr(bo: BaseOps = PlusOp)
The following code fails without a generic Expr:
object App {
val plus = new Plus[Int] {
def apply(i: Int, i2: Int) = i + i2
}
def main(a: Array[String]) {
val exp = Expr(PlusOp)
exp.bo(1,2)(plus)
}
}
The error:
found : App.plus.type (with underlying type java.lang.Object with Plus[Int])
required: exp.bo.T[Int]
exp.bo(1,2)(plus)
This makes it seem as if the type information from the abstract type T[A] <: BinaryOp[A] is not being substantiated with the information in the subtype PlusOp, which overrides the abstract type as T[A] = Plus[A]. Is there any way to work around this without making Expr generic?
With "-Ydependent-method-types",
def Expr(_bo: BaseOps = PlusOp) = new BaseOps {
override type T[A] = _bo.T[A]
val bo: _bo.type = _bo
}
But, I don't know what this precisely means...