Generic alternative to Execute Around Method pattern - scala

I was looking for an implementation of the Execute Around method pattern in scala, and found the following (with my minor mods):
class Resource private() {
private def dispose() { println("Cleaning up...") }
def example = {
println("Function body")
}
}
object Resource {
def using(codeBlock: Resource => Unit) {
val run = new Resource
try {
codeBlock(run)
}
finally {
run.dispose()
}
}
}
Resource.using { run => run.example }
Then I had second thoughts about using it for my particular application, since that's a lot of boilerplate code in all my classes.
I was wondering if the more experienced scala gurus were able to create a similar pattern, and wrap an entire object, calling a cleanup method when the object goes out of scope? This would be similar to the C# using() block, and I'd implement it by mixing in a Disposable trait to the objects that would support this method?
Example goal:
trait Disposable { def dispose }
class a extends Disposable
[some helper object unrelated to a?].using (a) {
} // automatically call a.dispose() at end of scope?

From this blog post you can implement something like Java's try with resources this way:
class Loan[A <: AutoCloseable](resource: A) {
def to[B](block: A => B) = {
var t: Throwable = null
try {
block(resource)
} catch {
case x: Exception => t = x; throw x
} finally {
if (resource != null) {
if (t != null) {
try {
resource.close()
} catch {
case y: Exception => t.addSuppressed(y)
}
} else {
resource.close()
}
}
}
}
}
object Loan {
def loan[A <: AutoCloseable](resource: A) = new Loan(resource)
}
you would use it like this:
loan (new PrintWriter(new File("file"))) to (_ println "Hello world!\n")
Using the Java AutoCloseable interface for this means that your objects can be used in a Java try-with-resources block and that you can use your helper with standard Java AutoCloseable things like IO streams.

Related

Uninitialized variable (block cannot contain declarations)

Following these examples and especially this code:
object Control {
def using[A <: { def close(): Unit }, B](resource: A)(f: A => B): B =
try {
f(resource)
} finally {
resource.close()
}
}
...
using(io.Source.fromFile("example.txt")) { source => { .....
I wanted to extend the using method so instead of a type which implements close it receives a string (filename), a function to open a source, and the processing function. In this way, I would avoid the exception which would be thrown in the above example in case the given file does not exist.
So I ended up with this code:
object Control
{
def using[A <: { def close(): Unit }, B](opener: String => A)(name:String)(func: A => B): Unit =
{
var resource:A
// ^ Error: 'Block cannot contain declarations'
try
{
resource = opener(name)
func(resource)
}
catch
{
case e: (_) => println(s"Failed to open resource '${name}' (${e})")
}
finally
{
println("Closing file ...")
resource.close()
}
}
}
So I am defining a method, which takes as first parameter an opener-function, which receives a string, and returns an object which implements close, a string (for the opener function), and a processing function.
However it won't let me declare the resource variable outside of the try-catch block (so I can reach it in the finally block). It will work if I just put it into the try block like var resource:A = opener(name), however then I cannot reach resource in the finally block.
How can I solve it? I have to say that I am still a beginner in Scala, so I am a bit lost here.
Here is a revised example that you can also run on Scastie:
import scala.util.control.NonFatal
import scala.language.reflectiveCalls
type Resource = { def close(): Unit }
def using[A <: Resource, B](opener: String => A)(name: String)(func: A => B): Unit = {
var resource = null.asInstanceOf[A]
try {
resource = opener(name)
func(resource)
} catch {
case NonFatal(e) => println(s"Failed to open resource '${name}' (${e.getMessage})")
} finally {
println("Closing resource...")
resource.close()
}
}
final class SomeKindOfResource(n: String) {
def use(): Int = n.toInt
def close(): Unit = {}
}
using(new SomeKindOfResource(_))("42")(n => println(n.use()))
using(new SomeKindOfResource(_))("NaN")(n => println(n.use()))
The piece that you were lacking is that initialization:
var resource = null.asInstanceOf[A]
Please note that despite what you may think, this does not throw a NullPointerException. You can read more about it here.
I've added a few more things you may be interested in:
explicitly importing scala.language.reflectiveCalls: structural typing is achieved at runtime through reflective calls (on the JVM, at least) and the compiler will tell you at compile time with a warning
naming the { def close(): Unit } to something that makes it a little bit more readable in the method signature using type
using NonFatal to handle exception (you can read more about it here)

Loss of type info in servlet code

I have a simple flash implementation for use with Jersey that looks like this:
#PostConstruct def before { flash.rotateIn }
#PreDestroy def after { flash.rotateOut }
object flash {
val KeyNow = "local.flash.now"
val KeyNext = "local.flash.next"
// case class Wrapper(wrapped: Map[String, Seq[String]])
case class Wrapper(wrapped: String)
def rotateIn {
for {
session <- Option(request.getSession(false))
obj <- Option(session.getAttribute(KeyNext))
} {
request.setAttribute(KeyNow, obj)
session.removeAttribute(KeyNext)
}
}
def rotateOut {
for (obj <- Option(request.getAttribute(KeyNext))) {
request.getSession.setAttribute(KeyNext, obj)
}
}
def now = Option(request.getAttribute(KeyNow)) match {
case Some(x: Wrapper) => x.wrapped
case Some(x) if x.isInstanceOf[Wrapper] => "WHAT"
case _ => "NOPE"
}
def next(value: String) {
request.setAttribute(KeyNext, Wrapper(value))
}
}
I have simplified it here somewhat, but it lets me set a value for flash with flash.next and read the current flash value with flash.now.
The weird thing is that my now value is always "WHAT". If I do something similar in my REPL, I don't have the same issues:
val req = new org.springframework.mock.web.MockHttpServletRequest
val res = req.getSession
res.setAttribute("foo", Wrapper("foo"))
req.setAttribute("foo", res.getAttribute("foo"))
// Is not None
Option(req.getAttribute("foo")).collect { case x: Wrapper => x }
Am I missing something obvious?
EDIT
I've added a minimal example webapp replicating this issue at https://github.com/kardeiz/sc-issue-20160229.
I tried your example. Check my answer for your other question for details how pattern matching works in this case.
In short, as you Wrapper is an inner class, patter matching also checks the "outer class" reference. It seems that depending on the application server implementation Router.flash can be different instance for each request, so pattern matching fails.
Simple fix for that is to make Wrapper top-level class, so it doesn't have reference to any other class.

scala, transform a callback pattern to a functional style internal iterator

Suppose this API is given and we cannot change it:
object ProviderAPI {
trait Receiver[T] {
def receive(entry: T)
def close()
}
def run(r: Receiver[Int]) {
new Thread() {
override def run() {
(0 to 9).foreach { i =>
r.receive(i)
Thread.sleep(100)
}
r.close()
}
}.start()
}
}
In this example, ProviderAPI.run takes a Receiver, calls receive(i) 10 times and then closes. Typically, ProviderAPI.run would call receive(i) based on a collection which could be infinite.
This API is intended to be used in imperative style, like an external iterator. If our application needs to filter, map and print this input, we need to implement a Receiver which mixes all these operations:
object Main extends App {
class MyReceiver extends ProviderAPI.Receiver[Int] {
def receive(entry: Int) {
if (entry % 2 == 0) {
println("Entry#" + entry)
}
}
def close() {}
}
ProviderAPI.run(new MyReceiver())
}
Now, the question is how to use the ProviderAPI in functional style, internal iterator (without changing the implementation of ProviderAPI, which is given to us). Note that ProviderAPI could also call receive(i) infinite times, so it is not an option to collect everything in a list (also, we should handle each result one by one, instead of collecting all the input first, and processing it afterwards).
I am asking how to implement such a ReceiverToIterator, so that we can use the ProviderAPI in functional style:
object Main extends App {
val iterator = new ReceiverToIterator[Int] // how to implement this?
ProviderAPI.run(iterator)
iterator
.view
.filter(_ % 2 == 0)
.map("Entry#" + _)
.foreach(println)
}
Update
Here are four solutions:
IteratorWithSemaphorSolution: The workaround solution I proposed first attached to the question
QueueIteratorSolution: Using the BlockingQueue[Option[T]] based on the suggestion of nadavwr.
It allows the producer to continue producing up to queueCapacity before being blocked by the consumer.
PublishSubjectSolution: Very simple solution, using PublishSubject from Netflix RxJava-Scala API.
SameThreadReceiverToTraversable: Very simple solution, by relaxing the constraints of the question
Updated: BlockingQueue of 1 entry
What you've implemented here is essentially Java's BlockingQueue, with a queue size of 1.
Main characteristic: uber-blocking. A slow consumer will kill your producer's performance.
Update: #gzm0 mentioned that BlockingQueue doesn't cover EOF. You'll have to use BlockingQueue[Option[T]] for that.
Update: Here's a code fragment. It can be made to fit with your Receiver.
Some of it inspired by Iterator.buffered. Note that peek is a misleading name, as it may block -- and so will hasNext.
// fairness enabled -- you probably want to preserve order...
// alternatively, disable fairness and increase buffer to be 'big enough'
private val queue = new java.util.concurrent.ArrayBlockingQueue[Option[T]](1, true)
// the following block provides you with a potentially blocking peek operation
// it should `queue.take` when the previous peeked head has been invalidated
// specifically, it will `queue.take` and block when the queue is empty
private var head: Option[T] = _
private var headDefined: Boolean = false
private def invalidateHead() { headDefined = false }
private def peek: Option[T] = {
if (!headDefined) {
head = queue.take()
headDefined = true
}
head
}
def iterator = new Iterator[T] {
// potentially blocking; only false upon taking `None`
def hasNext = peek.isDefined
// peeks and invalidates head; throws NoSuchElementException as appropriate
def next: T = {
val opt = peek; invalidateHead()
if (opt.isEmpty) throw new NoSuchElementException
else opt.get
}
}
Alternative: Iteratees
Iterator-based solutions will generally involve more blocking. Conceptually, you could use continuations on the thread doing the iteration to avoid blocking the thread, but continuations mess with Scala's for-comprehensions, so no joy down that road.
Alternatively, you could consider an iteratee-based solution. Iteratees are different than iterators in that the consumer isn't responsible for advancing the iteration -- the producer is. With iteratees, the consumer basically folds over the entries pushed by the producer over time. Folding each next entry as it becomes available can take place in a thread pool, since the thread is relinquished after each fold completes.
You won't get nice for-syntax for iteration, and the learning curve is a little challenging, but if you feel confident using a foldLeft you'll end up with a non-blocking solution that does look reasonable on the eye.
To read more about iteratees, I suggest taking a peek at PlayFramework 2.X's iteratee reference. The documentation describes their stand-alone iteratee library, which is 100% usable outside the context of Play. Scalaz 7 also has a comprehensive iteratee library.
IteratorWithSemaphorSolution
The first workaround solution that I proposed attached to the question.
I moved it here as an answer.
import java.util.concurrent.Semaphore
object Main extends App {
val iterator = new ReceiverToIterator[Int]
ProviderAPI.run(iterator)
iterator
.filter(_ % 2 == 0)
.map("Entry#" + _)
.foreach(println)
}
class ReceiverToIterator[T] extends ProviderAPI.Receiver[T] with Iterator[T] {
var lastEntry: T = _
var waitingToReceive = new Semaphore(1)
var waitingToBeConsumed = new Semaphore(1)
var eof = false
waitingToReceive.acquire()
def receive(entry: T) {
println("ReceiverToIterator.receive(" + entry + "). START.")
waitingToBeConsumed.acquire()
lastEntry = entry
waitingToReceive.release()
println("ReceiverToIterator.receive(" + entry + "). END.")
}
def close() {
println("ReceiverToIterator.close().")
eof = true
waitingToReceive.release()
}
def hasNext = {
println("ReceiverToIterator.hasNext().START.")
waitingToReceive.acquire()
waitingToReceive.release()
println("ReceiverToIterator.hasNext().END.")
!eof
}
def next = {
println("ReceiverToIterator.next().START.")
waitingToReceive.acquire()
if (eof) { throw new NoSuchElementException }
val entryToReturn = lastEntry
waitingToBeConsumed.release()
println("ReceiverToIterator.next().END.")
entryToReturn
}
}
QueueIteratorSolution
The second workaround solution that I proposed attached to the question. I moved it here as an answer.
Solution using the BlockingQueue[Option[T]] based on the suggestion of nadavwr.
It allows the producer to continue producing up to queueCapacity before being blocked by the consumer.
I implement a QueueToIterator that uses a ArrayBlockingQueue with a given capacity.
BlockingQueue has a take() method, but not a peek or hasNext, so I need an OptionNextToIterator as follows:
trait OptionNextToIterator[T] extends Iterator[T] {
def getOptionNext: Option[T] // abstract
def hasNext = { ... }
def next = { ... }
}
Note: I am using the synchronized block inside OptionNextToIterator, and I am not sure it is totally correct
Solution:
import java.util.concurrent.ArrayBlockingQueue
object Main extends App {
val receiverToIterator = new ReceiverToIterator[Int](queueCapacity = 3)
ProviderAPI.run(receiverToIterator)
Thread.sleep(3000) // test that ProviderAPI.run can produce 3 items ahead before being blocked by the consumer
receiverToIterator.filter(_ % 2 == 0).map("Entry#" + _).foreach(println)
}
class ReceiverToIterator[T](val queueCapacity: Int = 1) extends ProviderAPI.Receiver[T] with QueueToIterator[T] {
def receive(entry: T) { queuePut(entry) }
def close() { queueClose() }
}
trait QueueToIterator[T] extends OptionNextToIterator[T] {
val queueCapacity: Int
val queue = new ArrayBlockingQueue[Option[T]](queueCapacity)
var queueClosed = false
def queuePut(entry: T) {
if (queueClosed) { throw new IllegalStateException("The queue has already been closed."); }
queue.put(Some(entry))
}
def queueClose() {
queueClosed = true
queue.put(None)
}
def getOptionNext = queue.take
}
trait OptionNextToIterator[T] extends Iterator[T] {
def getOptionNext: Option[T]
var answerReady: Boolean = false
var eof: Boolean = false
var element: T = _
def hasNext = {
prepareNextAnswerIfNecessary()
!eof
}
def next = {
prepareNextAnswerIfNecessary()
if (eof) { throw new NoSuchElementException }
val retVal = element
answerReady = false
retVal
}
def prepareNextAnswerIfNecessary() {
if (answerReady) {
return
}
synchronized {
getOptionNext match {
case None => eof = true
case Some(e) => element = e
}
answerReady = true
}
}
}
PublishSubjectSolution
A very simple solution using PublishSubject from Netflix RxJava-Scala API:
// libraryDependencies += "com.netflix.rxjava" % "rxjava-scala" % "0.20.7"
import rx.lang.scala.subjects.PublishSubject
class MyReceiver[T] extends ProviderAPI.Receiver[T] {
val channel = PublishSubject[T]()
def receive(entry: T) { channel.onNext(entry) }
def close() { channel.onCompleted() }
}
object Main extends App {
val myReceiver = new MyReceiver[Int]()
ProviderAPI.run(myReceiver)
myReceiver.channel.filter(_ % 2 == 0).map("Entry#" + _).subscribe{n => println(n)}
}
ReceiverToTraversable
This stackoverflow question came when I wanted to list and process a svn repository using the svnkit.com API as follows:
SvnList svnList = new SvnOperationFactory().createList();
svnList.setReceiver(new ISvnObjectReceiver<SVNDirEntry>() {
public void receive(SvnTarget target, SVNDirEntry dirEntry) throws SVNException {
// do something with dirEntry
}
});
svnList.run();
the API used a callback function, and I wanted to use a functional style instead, as follows:
svnList.
.filter(e => "pom.xml".compareToIgnoreCase(e.getName()) == 0)
.map(_.getURL)
.map(getMavenArtifact)
.foreach(insertArtifact)
I thought of having a class ReceiverToIterator[T] extends ProviderAPI.Receiver[T] with Iterator[T],
but this required the svnkit api to run in another thread.
That's why I asked how to solve this problem with a ProviderAPI.run method that run in a new thread. But that was not very wise: if I had explained the real case, someone might have found a better solution before.
Solution
If we tackle the real problem (so, no need of using a thread for the svnkit),
a simpler solution is to implement a scala.collection.Traversable instead of a scala.collection.Iterator.
While Iterator requires a next and hasNext def, Traversable requires a foreach def,
which is very similar to the svnkit callback!
Note that by using view, we make the transformers lazy, so elements are passed one by one through all the chain to foreach(println).
this allows to process an infinite collection.
object ProviderAPI {
trait Receiver[T] {
def receive(entry: T)
def close()
}
// Later I found out that I don't need a thread
def run(r: Receiver[Int]) {
(0 to 9).foreach { i => r.receive(i); Thread.sleep(100) }
}
}
object Main extends App {
new ReceiverToTraversable[Int](r => ProviderAPI.run(r))
.view
.filter(_ % 2 == 0)
.map("Entry#" + _)
.foreach(println)
}
class ReceiverToTraversable[T](val runProducer: (ProviderAPI.Receiver[T] => Unit)) extends Traversable[T] {
override def foreach[U](f: (T) => U) = {
object MyReceiver extends ProviderAPI.Receiver[T] {
def receive(entry: T) = f(entry)
def close() = {}
}
runProducer(MyReceiver)
}
}

How do I ignore an exception?

Is there more elegant way to write the following?
try {
... // Some throwing code
return first
}
catch {
case e:ExceptionType => {} // No code to execute. Ignore error.
}
return second
scala.util.control.Exception.ignoring(classOf[ExceptionType]) {
... // Some throwing code
}
#Daniel has already provided the canonical method to use to do this. Look through the other methods in scala.util.control.Exception--they are quite helpful and generic!
If you need to get a return value out of the try block, use failing instead of ignoring (but be aware that the result is an Any, i.e. not typesafe).
You can also write your own exception-catcher, which will be a little slow for heavy-duty work but otherwise nice to use:
class DefaultOn[E <: Exception] {
def apply[A](default: => A)(f: => A)(implicit m: Manifest[E]) = {
try { f } catch { case x if (m.erasure.isInstance(x)) => default }
}
}
object DefaultOn { def apply[E <: Exception] = new DefaultOn[E] }
scala> DefaultOn[NumberFormatException](0) { "Hi".toInt }
res0: Int = 0
Or if you like options:
class TryOption[E <: Exception] {
def apply[A](f: => A)(implicit m: Manifest[E]) = {
try { Some(f) } catch { case x if (m.erasure.isInstance(x)) => None }
}
}
object TryOption { def apply[E <: Exception] = new TryOption[E] }
scala> TryOption[NumberFormatException] { "Hi".toInt }
res1: Option[Int] = None
Or you can be inspired by this plus the library routines and create your own methods to ignore multiple different exceptions and preserve types on the return value.
In Scala all exceptions are not checked, so if you don't want, you may just skip handling them (and thus exception will be escalated to a higher level). Silently ignoring an exception the way you want to do is generally a bad practice. However, your code can be shortened to:
try {
... // Some throwing code
} catch {
case e:ExceptionType =>
}
Hows about:
Try {
// some throwing code
}
This will ignore all non fatal exceptions, which is what you want to do most of the time.

Scala abstract method param question, List of T

I have a helper method:
def controlStructure[T <: SomeObject](exceptions: Class[_]*)(body: => T) = {
try {
val tempObject = body
tempObject.callSomeMethod
Some(tempObject)
} catch {
case e if (exceptions.contains(e.getClass)) => None
}
}
called with:
controlStructure[MySomeObject](classOf[Exception]) { getMySomeObjectSomehow }
the main point of which is to call the 'callSomeMethod' on the entity passed in (for example loaded from ORM), it incidentally wraps things up in exception handling too.
I would now like to add a new method which does the same thing but for a collection (java.util.List) of T.
I am unsure of the syntax, and structures to work with a collection of T in the method signature, and abstract type param definitions.
Thanks for your help.
With a scala list, you are wanting something like this (I think):
def controlStructure[T <: SomeObject](exceptions: Class[_]*)(body: => List[T]) = {
try {
val tempObject = body
tempObject.foreach { _.callSomeMethod() }
Some(tempObject)
}
catch {
case e if (exceptions.contains(e.getClass)) => None
}
}
I haven't worked with Java lists in scala, so I'm guessing you could do it with java.util.List like this:
def controlStructure[T <: SomeObject](exceptions: Class[_]*)(body: => java.util.List[T]) = {
import scala.collection.JavaConversions._
try {
val tempObject = body
tempObject foreach { _.callSomeMethod() }
Some(tempObject)
}
catch {
case e if (exceptions.contains(e.getClass)) => None
}
}
There's no pass by name vararg in Scala. You have to pass a function if you want this. See this ticket of an enhancement request to this effect.
Thanks for your help Mitch. It turns out the answer is in this case to specify the return type of the method, as java.util.List[T], as for once Scala is not using its magic type inference to sort everything out.