Is it possible to do something like the following?
def takeCurriedFnAsArg(f: (Int)(implicit MyClass) => Result)
Yes, it is possible.
When you have the second curried parameter marked as implicit, the function seems to be not of type
Int => (MyClass => Result) => ResultOfFunction
which it would be if the curried higher order function parameter was a regular parameter; instead, it looks like this:
Int => ResultOfFunction
Here's a quick example:
scala> def curriedFn(i : Int)(implicit func : String => Int) : Boolean = (i + func("test!")) % 2 == 0
curriedFn: (i: Int)(implicit func: String => Int)Boolean
scala> implicit val fn : String => Int = s => s.length
fn: String => Int = <function1>
scala> curriedFn _
res4: Int => Boolean = <function1>
As you can see, the implicit parameter got 'eliminated'. Why and how? That's a question for someone more knowledgeable than me. If I had to guess, I'd say the compiler directly substitutes the parameter with the implicit value, but that might very well be false.
Anyway, digressions aside, here's an example very relevant to your situation:
scala> def foo(func : Int => Boolean) = if(func(3)) "True!" else "False!"
foo: (func: Int => Boolean)String
scala> foo(curriedFn)
res2: String = True!
Now if the second function parameter wasn't implicit:
scala> def curriedNonImplicit(i : Int)(fn : String => Int) : Boolean = (i + fn("test!")) % 2 == 0
curriedNonImplicit: (i: Int)(fn: String => Int)Boolean
scala> curriedNonImplicit _
res5: Int => ((String => Int) => Boolean) = <function1>
As you can see, the type of the function is a bit different. That means that the solution will look different too:
scala> def baz(func : Int => (String => Int) => Boolean) = if(func(3)(s => s.length)) "True!" else "False!"
baz: (func: Int => ((String => Int) => Boolean))String
scala> baz(curriedNonImplicit)
res6: String = True!
You have to specify the function directly inside the method, as it wasn't implicitly provided before.
Related
What is the logical reason that the first form works and not the second?
scala> val d = (a: Int, b: Int) => a + b
d: (Int, Int) => Int = <function2>
scala> val d = (a: Int)(b: Int) => a + b
<console>:1: error: not a legal formal parameter.
Note: Tuples cannot be directly destructured in method or function parameters.
Either create a single parameter accepting the Tuple1,
or consider a pattern matching anonymous function: `{ case (param1, param1) => ... }
val d=(a:Int)(b:Int)=>a+b
Because multiple parameter lists aren't allowed on function declarations. If you want to curry a function, you do:
scala> val d: Int => Int => Int = a => b => a + b
d: Int => (Int => Int) = $$Lambda$1106/512934838#6ef4cbe1
scala> val f = d(3)
f: Int => Int = $$Lambda$1109/1933965693#7e2c6702
scala> f(4)
res6: Int = 7
You can also create a single parameter list and partially apply it:
scala> val d = (a: Int, b: Int) => a + b
d: (Int, Int) => Int = $$Lambda$1064/586164630#7c8874ef
scala> d(4, _: Int)
res2: Int => Int = $$Lambda$1079/2135563436#4a1a412e
We partially applied d with 4, and we got back a function, Int => Int, which means when we supply the next argument, we'll get the result:
scala> res2(3)
res3: Int = 7
We can also create a named method, and use eta-expansion to create a curried function out of it:
scala> def add(i: Int)(j: Int): Int = i + j
add: (i: Int)(j: Int)Int
scala> val curriedAdd = add _
curriedAdd: Int => (Int => Int) = $$Lambda$1115/287609100#f849027
scala> val onlyOneArgumentLeft = curriedAdd(1)
onlyOneArgumentLeft: Int => Int = $$Lambda$1116/1700143613#77e9dca8
scala> onlyOneArgumentLeft(2)
res8: Int = 3
Function currying is possible.
val curryFunc = (a: Int) => (b: Int) => a + b
curryFunc now has the type Int => (Int => Int)
There are some discussions here about this, but I have some specific questions I wasn't able to find an answer for. So, by call-by-name, I mean =>T type, and by 0-arity function I mean () => T
I understand (I think) the conceptual difference, but probably I am missing something as I still have lots of questions:
Why do we have the concept of =>T at all if we could always use () => T?
Is there any syntax/functional limitations of each? For now I found only that => cannnot be used as a class field. Is this the only limitation?
Is the generated code always the same for both?
Should I always prefer =>T? And why?
Is it correct to call =>T a type? It looks for me like it does not have any type representation in scala.
1) It's just more handy to use it, especially inside DSLs:
def printAndGet[T](f: => T) = {
val res = f
println(res + " printed")
res
}
scala> :paste
// Entering paste mode (ctrl-D to finish)
val k = printAndGet {
val a = 5
5 * a
}
// Exiting paste mode, now interpreting.
25 printed
k: Int = 25
2) => T can only be a parameter of method or function. And actually => T and () => T aren't interchangable:
scala> def aaa(f: => String) = f
aaa: (f: => String)String
scala> val a: Function1[() => String, String] = aaa _
<console>:8: error: type mismatch;
found : (=> String) => String
required: (() => String) => String
val a: Function1[() => String, String] = aaa _
^
Thanks to #som-snytt, fоund this one:
scala> object O { def f(i: Int) = i; def f(i: => Int) = i + 1 }
defined object O
scala> O.f(5)
res12: Int = 5
scala> O.f(5: (=> Int))
<console>:1: error: no by-name parameter type allowed here
O.f(5: (=> Int))
^
Even this which should work if it compiles - but it doesn't (scala 2.11.2, 2.11.5 REPL just crashes):
scala> val k: (=> Int) => Int = O.f _
k: (=> Int) => Int = <function1>
scala> k(5) //should be 6
res18: Int = 5 //WTF?
Last one seems like a bug
3) Not exactly, if you want the same, just convert => T into () => T:
scala> def aaa(f: => String) = {f _}
aaa: (f: => String)() => String
Bytecode may also differ. For instance, compiler will more likely inline code from => T without generating lambda for it. So, the key difference is that () => T is actually an object (first class citizen), => T isn't.
4) see 1, but sometimes you may need to ensure that user knows that computation might be delayed - () => T is better then.
5) It's part of a type signature, just look at eta-expansion of:
scala> def aaa(f: => String) = {f}
aaa: (f: => String)String
scala> aaa _ //convert method into a function
res7: (=> String) => String = <function1>
scala> val a: ( => String) => String = aaa _
a: (=> String) => String = <function1>
However scala doesn't recognize it as independent type:
scala> val a: Function1[( => String), String] = aaa _
<console>:1: error: no by-name parameter type allowed here
val a: Function1[( => String), String] = aaa _
^
I wrote a quite strange method in Scala.
def mystery(p: Int => String => Boolean): Int = ???
And now I cannot figure out what implementation and parameter value it should have.
So what is the simplest implementation this method can have? And what is the value we can pass to it?
My try:
def mystery(p: Int => String => Boolean): Int = {
val m = (x1: Int) => p(x1)
val n = (x2: String) => m(_)(x2)
val k = (x3: Boolean) => p(_)(_)(x3)
if (k) 1 else 0
}
How about this? p is a function, so to use it you need to pass it parameters. The parameters are curried, and the function is equivalent to Int => (String => Boolean). You give it an Int first, and it returns a function String => Boolean. So you give that a String, and it returns a Boolean.
def mystery(p: Int => String => Boolean): Int = {
val a = p(1)
val b = a("2")
if(b) 1 else 0
}
val f: Int => String => Boolean = (i: Int) => (s: String) => i.toString == s
mystery(f)
In your version, m, n, and k are all defined as functions. So, for example, when you say if (k) it doesn't make sense because if takes a Boolean, but you're giving it a function.
I am trying to define a Map literal with key: String, value: (Any)=>String. I tried the following, but get a syntax error:
def foo(x: Int): String = /...
def bar(x: Boolean): String = /...
val m = Map[String, (Any) => String]("hello" -> foo, "goodbye" -> bar)
Funny that no one actually gave a type that would work. Here's one such:
def foo(x: Int): String = x.toString
def bar(x: Boolean): String = x.toString
val m = Map[String, (Nothing) => String]("hello" -> foo, "goodbye" -> bar)
The reason why it works this way is because Function1 is contra-variant on the input, so (Nothing) => String is a superclass of (Int) => String. It is also co-variant on the output, so (Nothing) => Any would be a superclass to any other Function1.
Of course, you can't use it like that. Without manifests, you can't even uncover what the original type of Function1 is. You could try something like this, though:
def f[T : Manifest](v: T) = v -> manifest[T]
val m = Map[String, ((Nothing) => String, Manifest[_])]("hello" -> f(foo), "goodbye" -> f(bar))
val IntManifest = manifest[Int]
val BooleanManifest = manifest[Boolean]
val StringManifest = manifest[String]
m("hello")._2.typeArguments match {
case List(IntManifest, StringManifest) =>
m("hello")._1.asInstanceOf[(Int) => String](5)
case List(BooleanManifest, StringManifest) =>
m("hello")._1.asInstanceOf[(Boolean) => String](true)
case _ => "Unknown function type"
}
Int => String is not a subclass of Any => String, rather, the contrary. You can't put (replace) an Int => String function when a code expects Any => String, since that code can apply the function with, say, "hi".
#Ben suggestion works, but how is it useful? you can't invoke the function once you get it from the Map.
If you really want to do this, maybe define foo as a partial function:
val foo: PartialFunction[Any, String] = {case i: Int => ....}
Obviously, this will fail at runtime if you pass it a string, but you can always test if the function is ok for use with your parameter by using isDefinedAt. (another alternative may be manifests, but I don't see the value here)
If I let the compiler infer it I seem to get an illegal type:
scala> val m = Map("hello" -> foo _, "goodbye" -> bar _)
m: scala.collection.immutable.Map[java.lang.String,(Boolean with Int) => String] =
Map((hello,<function1>), (goodbye,<function1>))
scala> m("hello")(8)
<console>:9: error: type mismatch;
found : Int(8)
required: Boolean with Int
m("hello")(8)
scala> var q = new Boolean with Int
<console>:5: error: illegal inheritance from final class Boolean
var q = new Boolean with Int
Anyway, what you want is not the type Any but a generic of "any type" which is _:
scala> val mm = Map[String, (_) => String]("hello" -> foo _, "goodbye" -> bar _)
mm: scala.collection.immutable.Map[String,Function1[_, String]] =
Map((hello,<function1>), (goodbye,<function1>))
I just posted a question about how to invoke such functions because I don't actually know.
Trait Function1 is contravariant for parameter, so def foo(x: Int): String is not a (Any) => String. So the following would work:
scala> def baz(x: Any): String = "baz"
baz: (x: Any)String
scala> val m2 = Map[String, (String) => String]("hello" -> baz)
m2: scala.collection.immutable.Map[String,(String) => String] = Map((hello,<function1>))
This is how I did it to fulfill a similar requirement.
object MapToMethods {
private def increment(x: Int): Int = x+1
private def decrement(x: Int): Int = x-1
val m: Map[String, Int => Int] =Map("increment" -> increment, "decrement" ->decrement)
println(m("increment")(2)) //prints 3
println(m("decrement")(3)) //prints 2
}
Using XScalaWT, this compiled under Scala 2.7:
class NodeView(parent: Composite) extends Composite(parent) {
var nodeName: Label = null
this.contains(
label(
nodeName = _
)
)
}
With 2.8.0 RC1, I get this error:
type mismatch; found : main.scala.NodeView required: org.eclipse.swt.widgets.Label
The types are:
label(setups: (Label => Unit)*)(parent: Composite) : Label
contains(setups: (W => Unit)*) : W
So it looks like _ now binds to the outer function instead of inner.
Is this change intentional?
UPDATE: Here is a minimized example:
Scala 2.7.7:
scala> var i = 0
i: Int = 0
scala> def conv(f: Int => Unit) = if (_:Boolean) f(1) else f(0)
conv: ((Int) => Unit)(Boolean) => Unit
scala> def foo(g: Boolean => Unit) { g(true) }
foo: ((Boolean) => Unit)Unit
scala> foo(conv(i = _))
scala> i
res4: Int = 1
Scala 2.8.0RC3:
scala> var i = 0
i: Int = 0
scala> def conv(f: Int => Unit) = if (_:Boolean) f(1) else f(0)
conv: (f: (Int) => Unit)(Boolean) => Unit
scala> def foo(g: Boolean => Unit) { g(true) }
foo: (g: (Boolean) => Unit)Unit
scala> foo(conv(i = _))
<console>:9: error: type mismatch;
found : Boolean
required: Int
foo(conv(i = _))
^
scala> foo(conv(j => i = j))
scala> i
res3: Int = 1
Interestingly enough, this works:
scala> foo(conv(println _))
1
Here is the answer I got from Lukas Rytz on the scala-user list:
Hi Alexey,
there has been a change in semantics
when we introduced named arguments. An
expression
foo(a = _)
used to be parsed as follows:
foo(x => a = x)
In 2.8, "a" is treated as a named
argument, i.e. the expression is
parsed as:
x => foo(a = x)
I will add a migration warning for
this change.
I noticed the same thing and asked on Dave's blog:
http://www.coconut-palm-software.com/the_new_visual_editor/doku.php?id=blog:simplifying_swt_with_scala#comment__930ba2f0a020203873d33decce01ebc2
No answer there yet though. Just as you're saying, it seems like the _ binds to the outer closure rather than the inner one.
Changing
nodeName = _
to
x => nodeName = x
fixes the problem.