I have a class with several parameters such as class Building(val a: Int, val b: Int, val c: Int). This code I have to update it is this:
def updatedA(a: Int): Building = new Building(a, this.b, this.c)
def updatedB(b: Int): Building = new Building(this.a, b, this.c)
Is there a shorter way to get an updated object like the following?
def updatedA(newA: Int): Building = new { val a = newA } extends this // doesn't compile/ type is AnyRef instead of Building
Have you looked at the copyWith() construction mechanism ?
The copyWith method takes advantage of Scala 2.8's default arguments.
For each field in the class, it has a parameter which defaults to the
current value. Whichever arguments aren't specified will take on their
original values. We can call the method using named arguments (also in
Scala 2.8).
val newJoe = joe.copyWith(phone = "555-1234")
Or check out the copy mechanism for case classes.
/* The real power is the copy constructor that is automatically
generated in the case class. I can make a copy with any or all
attributes modifed by using the copy constructor and declaring which
field to modify */
scala> parent.copy(right = Some(node))
Related
Structural Sharing in Scala Immutable Collections is quite straightforward and there's a lot of material floating around to understand it.
Now every Scala case class automatically defines a copy method, which returns a new copy with the new attributes specified, my question is, does the method use Structural Sharing?
So when I have a
case class A(x: HugeObject, y: Int)
and call the copy method
val a = A(x,y)
val b = a.copy(y = 5)
Does it copy x?
A case class is flat tuple, as such when using copy a new instance is allocated with slots for each product element. However, the elements themselves are not in any form duplicated but shared by reference (except for the value passed into the copy method).
case class Foo(a: AnyRef, b: AnyRef)
val f1 = Foo(new AnyRef, new AnyRef)
val f2 = f1.copy(a = new AnyRef)
f1.a == f2.a // false
f1.b == f2.b // true
f1.b eq f2.b // true
So in your case, x is only reused as the same reference but not structurally duplicated.
It's been a while since I've used constructors at all- so naturally when I have to use one in Scala I'm having trouble.
I want to do the following: When I create a new class without passing through anything- it creates an empty vector.
Otherwise if it passes through a vector- we use that vector and define it to be used with the class.
How do I do this? I previously had
Class example{
val a: Vector[int] = Vector();
Then I'm lost. I was thinking of doing something like
Class example{
val a: Vector[Int] = Vector()
def this(vector: Vector[Int]){
this{
a = vector
}
}
But I'm getting tons of errors. Can anyone help? I'm trying to find my scala book but I can't find it- I know it had a good section on constructors.
Sounds like you want a constructor with a default argument:
class example(val a : Vector[Int] = Vector())
If you really want to do this by constructor overloading, it looks like this:
class Example(val a: Vector[Int]) {
def this() = this(Vector())
}
Personal-opinion addendum: Overloading and default arguments are often good to avoid. I'd recommend just making a different function that calls the constructor:
class Example(val a: Vector[Int])
object Example {
def empty = new Example(Vector())
}
case class Example(a: Vector[Int] = Vector())
No need to put the val keyword.
Also, using the case keywork you get:
a compact initialisation syntax: Example(Vector(1,2)), instead of new Example(Vector(1,2))
pattern matching for you class
equality comparisons implicitly defined and pretty toString
Reference
I was making my way through the Scala playframework tutorial and I came across this snippet of code which had me puzzled:
def newTask = Action { implicit request =>
taskForm.bindFromRequest.fold(
errors => BadRequest(views.html.index(Task.all(), errors)),
label => {
Task.create(label)
Redirect(routes.Application.tasks())
}
)
}
So I decided to investigate and came across this post.
I still don't get it.
What is the difference between this:
implicit def double2Int(d : Double) : Int = d.toInt
and
def double2IntNonImplicit(d : Double) : Int = d.toInt
other than the obvious fact they have different method names.
When should I use implicit and why?
I'll explain the main use cases of implicits below, but for more detail see the relevant chapter of Programming in Scala.
Implicit parameters
The final parameter list on a method can be marked implicit, which means the values will be taken from the context in which they are called. If there is no implicit value of the right type in scope, it will not compile. Since the implicit value must resolve to a single value and to avoid clashes, it's a good idea to make the type specific to its purpose, e.g. don't require your methods to find an implicit Int!
example:
// probably in a library
class Prefixer(val prefix: String)
def addPrefix(s: String)(implicit p: Prefixer) = p.prefix + s
// then probably in your application
implicit val myImplicitPrefixer = new Prefixer("***")
addPrefix("abc") // returns "***abc"
Implicit conversions
When the compiler finds an expression of the wrong type for the context, it will look for an implicit Function value of a type that will allow it to typecheck. So if an A is required and it finds a B, it will look for an implicit value of type B => A in scope (it also checks some other places like in the B and A companion objects, if they exist). Since defs can be "eta-expanded" into Function objects, an implicit def xyz(arg: B): A will do as well.
So the difference between your methods is that the one marked implicit will be inserted for you by the compiler when a Double is found but an Int is required.
implicit def doubleToInt(d: Double) = d.toInt
val x: Int = 42.0
will work the same as
def doubleToInt(d: Double) = d.toInt
val x: Int = doubleToInt(42.0)
In the second we've inserted the conversion manually; in the first the compiler did the same automatically. The conversion is required because of the type annotation on the left hand side.
Regarding your first snippet from Play:
Actions are explained on this page from the Play documentation (see also API docs). You are using
apply(block: (Request[AnyContent]) ⇒ Result): Action[AnyContent]
on the Action object (which is the companion to the trait of the same name).
So we need to supply a Function as the argument, which can be written as a literal in the form
request => ...
In a function literal, the part before the => is a value declaration, and can be marked implicit if you want, just like in any other val declaration. Here, request doesn't have to be marked implicit for this to type check, but by doing so it will be available as an implicit value for any methods that might need it within the function (and of course, it can be used explicitly as well). In this particular case, this has been done because the bindFromRequest method on the Form class requires an implicit Request argument.
WARNING: contains sarcasm judiciously! YMMV...
Luigi's answer is complete and correct. This one is only to extend it a bit with an example of how you can gloriously overuse implicits, as it happens quite often in Scala projects. Actually so often, you can probably even find it in one of the "Best Practice" guides.
object HelloWorld {
case class Text(content: String)
case class Prefix(text: String)
implicit def String2Text(content: String)(implicit prefix: Prefix) = {
Text(prefix.text + " " + content)
}
def printText(text: Text): Unit = {
println(text.content)
}
def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = {
printText("World!")
}
// Best to hide this line somewhere below a pile of completely unrelated code.
// Better yet, import its package from another distant place.
implicit val prefixLOL = Prefix("Hello")
}
In scala implicit works as:
Converter
Parameter value injector
Extension method
There are some uses of Implicit
Implicitly type conversion : It converts the error producing assignment into intended type
val x :String = "1"
val y:Int = x
String is not the sub type of Int , so error happens in line 2. To resolve the error the compiler will look for such a method in the scope which has implicit keyword and takes a String as argument and returns an Int .
so
implicit def z(a:String):Int = 2
val x :String = "1"
val y:Int = x // compiler will use z here like val y:Int=z(x)
println(y) // result 2 & no error!
Implicitly receiver conversion: We generally by receiver call object's properties, eg. methods or variables . So to call any property by a receiver the property must be the member of that receiver's class/object.
class Mahadi{
val haveCar:String ="BMW"
}
class Johnny{
val haveTv:String = "Sony"
}
val mahadi = new Mahadi
mahadi.haveTv // Error happening
Here mahadi.haveTv will produce an error. Because scala compiler will first look for the haveTv property to mahadi receiver. It will not find. Second it will look for a method in scope having implicit keyword which take Mahadi object as argument and returns Johnny object. But it does not have here. So it will create error. But the following is okay.
class Mahadi{
val haveCar:String ="BMW"
}
class Johnny{
val haveTv:String = "Sony"
}
val mahadi = new Mahadi
implicit def z(a:Mahadi):Johnny = new Johnny
mahadi.haveTv // compiler will use z here like new Johnny().haveTv
println(mahadi.haveTv)// result Sony & no error
Implicitly parameter injection: If we call a method and do not pass its parameter value, it will cause an error. The scala compiler works like this - first will try to pass value, but it will get no direct value for the parameter.
def x(a:Int)= a
x // ERROR happening
Second if the parameter has any implicit keyword it will look for any val in the scope which have the same type of value. If not get it will cause error.
def x(implicit a:Int)= a
x // error happening here
To slove this problem compiler will look for a implicit val having the type of Int because the parameter a has implicit keyword.
def x(implicit a:Int)=a
implicit val z:Int =10
x // compiler will use implicit like this x(z)
println(x) // will result 10 & no error.
Another example:
def l(implicit b:Int)
def x(implicit a:Int)= l(a)
we can also write it like-
def x(implicit a:Int)= l
Because l has a implicit parameter and in scope of method x's body, there is an implicit local variable(parameters are local variables) a which is the parameter of x, so in the body of x method the method-signature l's implicit argument value is filed by the x method's local implicit variable(parameter) a implicitly.
So
def x(implicit a:Int)= l
will be in compiler like this
def x(implicit a:Int)= l(a)
Another example:
def c(implicit k:Int):String = k.toString
def x(a:Int => String):String =a
x{
x => c
}
it will cause error, because c in x{x=>c} needs explicitly-value-passing in argument or implicit val in scope.
So we can make the function literal's parameter explicitly implicit when we call the method x
x{
implicit x => c // the compiler will set the parameter of c like this c(x)
}
This has been used in action method of Play-Framework
in view folder of app the template is declared like
#()(implicit requestHreader:RequestHeader)
in controller action is like
def index = Action{
implicit request =>
Ok(views.html.formpage())
}
if you do not mention request parameter as implicit explicitly then you must have been written-
def index = Action{
request =>
Ok(views.html.formpage()(request))
}
Extension Method
Think, we want to add new method with Integer object. The name of the method will be meterToCm,
> 1 .meterToCm
res0 100
to do this we need to create an implicit class within a object/class/trait . This class can not be a case class.
object Extensions{
implicit class MeterToCm(meter:Int){
def meterToCm={
meter*100
}
}
}
Note the implicit class will only take one constructor parameter.
Now import the implicit class in the scope you are wanting to use
import Extensions._
2.meterToCm // result 200
Why and when you should mark the request parameter as implicit:
Some methods that you will make use of in the body of your action have an implicit parameter list like, for example, Form.scala defines a method:
def bindFromRequest()(implicit request: play.api.mvc.Request[_]): Form[T] = { ... }
You don't necessarily notice this as you would just call myForm.bindFromRequest() You don't have to provide the implicit arguments explicitly. No, you leave the compiler to look for any valid candidate object to pass in every time it comes across a method call that requires an instance of the request. Since you do have a request available, all you need to do is to mark it as implicit.
You explicitly mark it as available for implicit use.
You hint the compiler that it's "OK" to use the request object sent in by the Play framework (that we gave the name "request" but could have used just "r" or "req") wherever required, "on the sly".
myForm.bindFromRequest()
see it? it's not there, but it is there!
It just happens without your having to slot it in manually in every place it's needed (but you can pass it explicitly, if you so wish, no matter if it's marked implicit or not):
myForm.bindFromRequest()(request)
Without marking it as implicit, you would have to do the above. Marking it as implicit you don't have to.
When should you mark the request as implicit? You only really need to if you are making use of methods that declare an implicit parameter list expecting an instance of the Request. But to keep it simple, you could just get into the habit of marking the request implicit always. That way you can just write beautiful terse code.
Also, in the above case there should be only one implicit function whose type is double => Int. Otherwise, the compiler gets confused and won't compile properly.
//this won't compile
implicit def doubleToInt(d: Double) = d.toInt
implicit def doubleToIntSecond(d: Double) = d.toInt
val x: Int = 42.0
I had the exact same question as you had and I think I should share how I started to understand it by a few really simple examples (note that it only covers the common use cases).
There are two common use cases in Scala using implicit.
Using it on a variable
Using it on a function
Examples are as follows
Using it on a variable. As you can see, if the implicit keyword is used in the last parameter list, then the closest variable will be used.
// Here I define a class and initiated an instance of this class
case class Person(val name: String)
val charles: Person = Person("Charles")
// Here I define a function
def greeting(words: String)(implicit person: Person) = person match {
case Person(name: String) if name != "" => s"$name, $words"
case _ => "$words"
}
greeting("Good morning") // Charles, Good moring
val charles: Person = Person("")
greeting("Good morning") // Good moring
Using it on a function. As you can see, if the implicit is used on the function, then the closest type conversion method will be used.
val num = 10 // num: Int (of course)
// Here I define a implicit function
implicit def intToString(num: Int) = s"$num -- I am a String now!"
val num = 10 // num: Int (of course). Nothing happens yet.. Compiler believes you want 10 to be an Int
// Util...
val num: String = 10 // Compiler trust you first, and it thinks you have `implicitly` told it that you had a way to covert the type from Int to String, which the function `intToString` can do!
// So num is now actually "10 -- I am a String now!"
// console will print this -> val num: String = 10 -- I am a String now!
Hope this can help.
A very basic example of Implicits in scala.
Implicit parameters:
val value = 10
implicit val multiplier = 3
def multiply(implicit by: Int) = value * by
val result = multiply // implicit parameter wiil be passed here
println(result) // It will print 30 as a result
Note: Here multiplier will be implicitly passed into the function multiply. Missing parameters to the function call are looked up by type in the current scope meaning that code will not compile if there is no implicit variable of type Int in the scope.
Implicit conversions:
implicit def convert(a: Double): Int = a.toInt
val res = multiply(2.0) // Type conversions with implicit functions
println(res) // It will print 20 as a result
Note: When we call multiply function passing a double value, the compiler will try to find the conversion implicit function in the current scope, which converts Int to Double (As function multiply accept Int parameter). If there is no implicit convert function then the compiler will not compile the code.
In Mercury I can use:
A = B^some_field := SomeValue
to bind A to a copy of B, except that some_field is SomeValue instead of whatever it was in B. I believe the Haskell equivalent is something like:
a = b { some_field = some_value }
Does Scala have something like this for "modifying" immutable values. The alternative seems to be to have a constructor that directly sets every field in the instance, which isn't always ideal (if there are invarients the constructor should be maintaining). Plus it would be really clunky and much more fragile if I had to explicitly pass every other value in the instance I want to have a modified copy of.
I couldn't find anything about this by googling, or in a brief survey of the language reference manual or "Scala By Example" (which I have read start-to-finish, but haven't absorbed all of yet, so it may well be in there).
I can see that this feature could have some weird interactions with Java-style access protection and subclasses though...
If you define your class as a case class, a convenient copy method is generated, and calling it you can specify with named parameters new values for certain fields.
scala> case class Sample(str: String, int: Int)
defined class Sample
scala> val s = Sample("text", 42)
s: Sample = Sample(text,42)
scala> val s2 = s.copy(str = "newText")
s2: Sample = Sample(newText,42)
It even works with polymorphic case classes:
scala> case class Sample[T](t: T, int: Int)
defined class Sample
scala> val s = Sample("text", 42)
s: Sample[java.lang.String] = Sample(text,42)
scala> val s2 = s.copy(t = List(1,2,3), 42)
s2: Sample[List[Int]] = Sample(List(1, 2, 3),42)
Note that s2 has a different type than s.
You can use case classes for this, but you don't have to. Case classes are nothing magical - the modifier case just saves you a lot of typing.
The copy method is realized by the use of named and default parameters. The names are the same as the fields and the defaults are the current values of the fields. Here's an example:
class ClassWithCopy(val field1:String, val field2:Int) {
def copy(field1:String = this.field1, field2:Int = this.field2) = {
new ClassWithCopy(field1,field2);
}
}
You can use this just like the copy method on case classes. Named and default parameters are a very useful feature, and not only for copy methods.
If the object you're planning on modifying is a case class then you can use the autogenerated copy method:
scala> val user = User(2, "Sen")
user: User = User(2,Sen)
scala> val corrected = user.copy(name = "Sean")
corrected: User = User(2,Sean)
I would like to write a class looking like this:
class Store[+A](dest: Symbol)(implicit c: String => A) extends Action(dest) {
override def update(options: HashMap[Symbol,Any], arg: String): Unit = {
options += ((dest -> c(arg)))
}
}
object Store {
def apply[A](dest: Symbol)(c: String=>A) = new Store[A](dest)(c)
def apply[A](dest: Symbol) = new Store[A](dest)
}
Doing so, I have a few problems:
Using implicit with strings causes no end of trouble
Anyway, the system doesn't find the implicit if they are defined in my module, they would need to be defined in the module creating the class
the second apply method of the Store object just doesn't compile as A will be erased so the compiler has no way of finding a conversion from String to A
How would you create such an object that convert a string to some other type? I wouldn't want the user of the library to enter the type rwice (i.e. by specifying both the type and the conversion function).
I don't understand what you are trying with the second apply. To me, it looks like the first apply should have the implicit keyword, and you'd be done with it. You can either pass the parameter explicitly, or leave it out if an implicit is present. Also, you wouldn't need to pass c explicitly, since you'd already have it implicitly in the scope of the first apply.
I'd venture the second apply doesn't compile because there's no implicit String => A available in the scope of object Store.