I wrote this test method in Scala to test a REST service.
#Test def whenRequestProductInfo() {
// When Request Product Info
forAll { (productId: Int) =>
val result = mockMvc().perform(get(s"/products/$productId")
.accept(MediaType.parseMediaType(APPLICATION_JSON_CHARSET_UTF_8)))
.andExpect(status.isOk)
.andExpect(content.contentType(APPLICATION_JSON_CHARSET_UTF_8))
.andReturn;
val productInfo = mapper.readValue(result.getResponse.getContentAsString, classOf[ProductInfo])
// At least one is not null
// assert(productInfo.getInventoryInfo != null)
}
}
But I want to test that at least one productInfo.getInventoryInfo is not null instead of every productInfo.getInventoryInfo is not null.
Assuming we have a list of product ids:
val productIds: List[Int] = ???
We ought to factor the conversion from productId to productInfo into another val. (I would think this method or something similar would exist in your code elsewhere).
val inventoryInfo = productIds.map { case productId =>
val result = mockMvc().perform(get(s"/products/$productId")
.accept(MediaType.parseMediaType(APPLICATION_JSON_CHARSET_UTF_8)))
.andExpect(status.isOk)
.andExpect(content.contentType(APPLICATION_JSON_CHARSET_UTF_8))
.andReturn
val productInfo = mapper.readValue(result.getResponse.getContentAsString, classOf[ProductInfo])
productInfo.getInventoryInfo
}
Now we have a list of inventory info, whatever type that is. We can use atLeast to check that at least one inventory info from the collection is not null.
atLeast(1, inventoryInfo) should not be null
It doesn't seem like ScalaTest has any curried version of this like with forAll, so the syntax is much different and not quite as nice if you need to do a bunch of computations.
forAll can be passed configuration for the number of successful evaluations needed and number of failed evaluations allowed. This should accomplish what you are looking for. Documentation here at the end of the page.
Example:
forAll (minSuccessful(1)) { (productId: Int) => ...
Related
I have a List of “rules” tuples as follows:
val rules = List[(A, List[B])], where A and B are two separate case-classes
For the purposes of my use-case, I need to convert this to an Option[(A, List[B])]. The A case class contains a property id which is of type Option[String], based on which the tuple is returned.
I have written a function def findRule(entryId: Option[String]), from which I intend to return the tuple (A, List[B]) whose A.id = entryId as an Option. So far, I have written the following snippet of code:
def findRule(entryId: Option[String]) = {
for {
ruleId <- rules.flatMap(_._1.id) // ruleId is a String
id <- entryId // entryId is an Option[String]
} yield {
rules.find(_ => ruleId.equalsIgnoreCase(id)) // returns List[Option[(A, List[B])]
}
}
This snippet returns a List[Option[(A, List[B])] but I can’t figure out how to retrieve just the Option from it. Using .head() isn’t an option, since the rules list may be empty. Please help as I am new to Scala.
Example (the real examples are too large to post here, so please consider this representative example):
val rules = [(A = {id=1, ….}, B = [{B1}, {B2}, {B3}, …]), (A={id=2, ….}, B = [{B10}, {B11}, {B12}, …]), …. ] (B is not really important here, I need to find the tuple based on the id element of case-class A)
Now, suppose entryId = Some(1)
After the findRule() function, this would currently look like:
[Some((A = {id=1, …}, B = [{B1}, {B2}, {B3}, …]))]
I want to return:
Some((A = {id=1, …}, B = [{B1}, {B2}, {B3}, …])) , ie, the Option within the List returned (currently) from findRule()
From your question, it sounds like you're trying to pick a single item from your list based on some conditional, which means you'll probably want to start with rules.find. The problem then becomes how to express the predicate function that you pass to find.
From my read of your question, the conditional is
The id on the A part of the tuple needs to match the entryId that was passed in elsewhere
def findRule(entryId: Option[String]) =
rules.find { case (a, listOfB) => entryId.contains(a.id) }
The case expression is just nice syntax for dealing with the tuple. I could have also done
rules.find { tup => entryId.contains(tup._1.id) }
The contains method on Option roughly does "if I'm a Some, see if my value equals the argument; if I'm a None, just return false and ignore the argument". It works as a comparison between the Option[String] you have for entryId and the plain String you have for A's id.
Your first attempt didn't work because rules.flatMap got you a List, and using that after the <- in the for-comprehension means another flatMap, which keeps things as a List.
A variant that I personally prefer is
def findRule(entryId: Option[String]): Option[(A, List[B])] = {
entryId.flatMap { id =>
rules.find { case (a, _) => a.id == id }
}
}
In the case where entryId is None, it just immediately returns None. If you start with rules.find, then it will iterate through all of the rules and check each one even when entryId is None. It's unlikely to make any observable performance difference if the list of rules is small, but I also find it more intuitive to understand.
I want to log in the event that a record doesn't have an adjoining record. Is there a purely functional way to do this? One that separates the side effect from the data transformation?
Here's an example of what I need to do:
val records: Seq[Record] = Seq(record1, record2, ...)
val accountsMap: Map[Long, Account] = Map(record1.id -> account1, ...)
def withAccount(accountsMap: Map[Long, Account])(r: Record): (Record, Option[Account]) = {
(r, accountsMap.get(r.id))
}
def handleNoAccounts(tuple: (Record, Option[Account]) = {
val (r, a) = tuple
if (a.isEmpty) logger.error(s"no account for ${record.id}")
tuple
}
def toRichAccount(tuple: (Record, Option[Account]) = {
val (r, a) = tuple
a.map(acct => RichAccount(r, acct))
}
records
.map(withAccount(accountsMap))
.map(handleNoAccounts) // if no account is found, log
.flatMap(toRichAccount)
So there are multiple issues with this approach that I think make it less than optimal.
The tuple return type is clumsy. I have to destructure the tuple in both of the latter two functions.
The logging function has to handle the logging and then return the tuple with no changes. It feels weird that this is passed to .map even though no transformation is taking place -- maybe there is a better way to get this side effect.
Is there a functional way to clean this up?
I could be wrong (I often am) but I think this does everything that's required.
records
.flatMap(r =>
accountsMap.get(r.id).fold{
logger.error(s"no account for ${r.id}")
Option.empty[RichAccount]
}{a => Some(RichAccount(r,a))})
If you're using scala 2.13 or newer you could use tapEach, which takes function A => Unit to apply side effect on every element of function and then passes collection unchanged:
//you no longer need to return tuple in side-effecting function
def handleNoAccounts(tuple: (Record, Option[Account]): Unit = {
val (r, a) = tuple
if (a.isEmpty) logger.error(s"no account for ${record.id}")
}
records
.map(withAccount(accountsMap))
.tapEach(handleNoAccounts) // if no account is found, log
.flatMap(toRichAccount)
In case you're using older Scala, you could provide extension method (updated according to Levi's Ramsey suggestion):
implicit class SeqOps[A](s: Seq[A]) {
def tapEach(f: A => Unit): Seq[A] = {
s.foreach(f)
s
}
}
I am trying to incorporate a database into my http-microservice.
The microservice has a function getValueFromInternet(val: Foo): Future[Value] which was being called by my microservice on a GET request. Now, I want it to happen such that, a function getValue(val: Foo): Future[Value] would first query a db and if the database returns no results, call getValueFromInternet. The database query returns a Future[Seq[Value2]] where I can convert Value2 to Value using a function. And if no entry is found corresponding to that value, an empty Vector is returned.
This is what I have tried so far:
def getValue(val: Foo): Future[Value] = {
val resultFuture = db.getValue(val)
// 1st attempt. Clearly wrong
resultFuture onComplete {
case Success(Vector()) => getValueFromInternet(val)
case Success(vec) => convertValue2to1(vec.head)
}
// 2nd attempt. This is also wrong
resultFuture match {
case Future(Success(Vector())) => getValueFromInternet(val)
case Future(Success(vec)) => convertValue2to1(vec.head)
}
}
I would be grateful for any help suggesting how I can do this.
I have implemented the database and microservice independently and you can find them here and here
You have to use flatMap, since the thing you want to do if the first operation does not return a result also returns a future.
This is as close to your code as possible while still compiling. Note that you can't have identifiers called val in scala, since that is a keyword.
def getValue(v: Foo)(implicit ec: ExecutionContext): Future[Value] = {
val resultFuture: Future[Seq[Value2]] = db.getValue(v)
resultFuture.flatMap { vec =>
if(vec.isEmpty)
getValueFromInternet(v)
else
Future.successful(convertValue2to1(vec.head))
}
}
Consider the following structure (in reality the structure is a bit more complex):
case class A(id:String,name:String) {
override def equals(obj: Any):Boolean = {
if (obj == null || !obj.isInstanceOf[A]) return false
val a = obj.asInstanceOf[A]
name == a.name
}
override def hashCode() = {
31 + name.hashCode
}
}
val a1 = A("1","a")
val a2 = A("2","a")
val a3 = A("3","b")
val list = List((a1,a2),(a1,a3),(a2,a3))
Now let's say I want to group all tuples with equal A's. I could implement it like this
list.groupBy {
case (x,y) => (x,y)
}
But, I don't like to use pattern matching here, because it's not adding anything here. I want something simple, like this:
list.groupBy(_)
Unfortunately, this doesn't compile. Not even when I do:
list.groupBy[(A,A)](_)
Any suggestions how to simplify my code?
list.groupBy { case (x,y) => (x,y) }
Here you are deconstructing the tuple into its two constituent parts, just to immediately reassemble them exactly like they were before. In other words: you aren't actually doing anything useful. The input and output are identical. This is just the same as
list.groupBy { t => t }
which is of course just the identity function, which Scala helpfully provides for us:
list groupBy identity
If you want to group the elements of a list accoding to their own equals method, you only need to pass the identity function to groupBy:
list.groupBy(x=>x)
It's not enough to write list.groupBy(_) because of the scope of _, that is it would be desugared to x => list.groupBy(x), which is of course not what you want.
I have a list of possible input Values
val inputValues = List(1,2,3,4,5)
I have a really long to compute function that gives me a result
def reallyLongFunction( input: Int ) : Option[String] = { ..... }
Using scala parallel collections, I can easily do
inputValues.par.map( reallyLongFunction( _ ) )
To get what all the results are, in parallel. The problem is, I don't really want all the results, I only want the FIRST result. As soon as one of my input is a success, I want my output, and want to move on with my life. This did a lot of extra work.
So how do I get the best of both worlds? I want to
Get the first result that returns something from my long function
Stop all my other threads from useless work.
Edit -
I solved it like a dumb java programmer by having
#volatile var done = false;
Which is set and checked inside my reallyLongFunction. This works, but does not feel very scala. Would like a better way to do this....
(Updated: no, it doesn't work, doesn't do the map)
Would it work to do something like:
inputValues.par.find({ v => reallyLongFunction(v); true })
The implementation uses this:
protected[this] class Find[U >: T](pred: T => Boolean, protected[this] val pit: IterableSplitter[T]) extends Accessor[Option[U], Find[U]] {
#volatile var result: Option[U] = None
def leaf(prev: Option[Option[U]]) = { if (!pit.isAborted) result = pit.find(pred); if (result != None) pit.abort }
protected[this] def newSubtask(p: IterableSplitter[T]) = new Find(pred, p)
override def merge(that: Find[U]) = if (this.result == None) result = that.result
}
which looks pretty similar in spirit to your #volatile except you don't have to look at it ;-)
I took interpreted your question in the same way as huynhjl, but if you just want to search and discardNones, you could do something like this to avoid the need to repeat the computation when a suitable outcome is found:
class Computation[A,B](value: A, function: A => B) {
lazy val result = function(value)
}
def f(x: Int) = { // your function here
Thread.sleep(100 - x)
if (x > 5) Some(x * 10)
else None
}
val list = List.range(1, 20) map (i => new Computation(i, f))
val found = list.par find (_.result.isDefined)
//found is Option[Computation[Int,Option[Int]]]
val result = found map (_.result.get)
//result is Option[Int]
However find for parallel collections seems to do a lot of unnecessary work (see this question), so this might not work well, with current versions of Scala at least.
Volatile flags are used in the parallel collections (take a look at the source for find, exists, and forall), so I think your idea is a good one. It's actually better if you can include the flag in the function itself. It kills referential transparency on your function (i.e. for certain inputs your function now sometimes returns None rather than Some), but since you're discarding the stopped computations, this shouldn't matter.
If you're willing to use a non-core library, I think Futures would be a good match for this task. For instance:
Akka's Futures include Futures.firstCompletedOf
Twitter's Futures include Future.select
...both of which appear to enable the functionality you're looking for.