I am working on a small GUI application written in Scala. There are a few settings that the user will set in the GUI and I want them to persist between program executions. Basically I want a scala.collections.mutable.Map that automatically persists to a file when modified.
This seems like it must be a common problem, but I have been unable to find a lightweight solution. How is this problem typically solved?
I do a lot of this, and I use .properties files (it's idiomatic in Java-land). I keep my config pretty straight-forward by design, though. If you have nested config constructs you might want a different format like YAML (if humans are the main authors) or JSON or XML (if machines are the authors).
Here's some example code for loading props, manipulating as Scala Map, then saving as .properties again:
import java.io._
import java.util._
import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
val f = new File("test.properties")
// test.properties:
// foo=bar
// baz=123
val props = new Properties
// Note: in real code make sure all these streams are
// closed carefully in try/finally
val fis = new InputStreamReader(new FileInputStream(f), "UTF-8")
props.load(fis)
fis.close()
println(props) // {baz=123, foo=bar}
val map = props.asScala // Get to Scala Map via JavaConverters
map("foo") = "42"
map("quux") = "newvalue"
println(map) // Map(baz -> 123, quux -> newvalue, foo -> 42)
println(props) // {baz=123, quux=newvalue, foo=42}
val fos = new OutputStreamWriter(new FileOutputStream(f), "UTF-8")
props.store(fos, "")
fos.close()
Here's an example of using XML and a case class for reading a config. A real class can be nicer than a map. (You could also do what sbt and at least one project do, take the config as Scala source and compile it in; saving it is less automatic. Or as a repl script. I haven't googled, but someone must have done that.)
Here's the simpler code.
This version uses a case class:
case class PluginDescription(name: String, classname: String) {
def toXML: Node = {
<plugin>
<name>{name}</name>
<classname>{classname}</classname>
</plugin>
}
}
object PluginDescription {
def fromXML(xml: Node): PluginDescription = {
// extract one field
def getField(field: String): Option[String] = {
val text = (xml \\ field).text.trim
if (text == "") None else Some(text)
}
def extracted = {
val name = "name"
val claas = "classname"
val vs = Map(name -> getField(name), claas -> getField(claas))
if (vs.values exists (_.isEmpty)) fail()
else PluginDescription(name = vs(name).get, classname = vs(claas).get)
}
def fail() = throw new RuntimeException("Bad plugin descriptor.")
// check the top-level tag
xml match {
case <plugin>{_*}</plugin> => extracted
case _ => fail()
}
}
}
This code reflectively calls the apply of a case class. The use case is that fields missing from config can be supplied by default args. No type conversions here. E.g., case class Config(foo: String = "bar").
// isn't it easier to write a quick loop to reflect the field names?
import scala.reflect.runtime.{currentMirror => cm, universe => ru}
import ru._
def fromXML(xml: Node): Option[PluginDescription] = {
def extract[A]()(implicit tt: TypeTag[A]): Option[A] = {
// extract one field
def getField(field: String): Option[String] = {
val text = (xml \\ field).text.trim
if (text == "") None else Some(text)
}
val apply = ru.newTermName("apply")
val module = ru.typeOf[A].typeSymbol.companionSymbol.asModule
val ts = module.moduleClass.typeSignature
val m = (ts member apply).asMethod
val im = cm reflect (cm reflectModule module).instance
val mm = im reflectMethod m
def getDefault(i: Int): Option[Any] = {
val n = ru.newTermName("apply$default$" + (i+1))
val m = ts member n
if (m == NoSymbol) None
else Some((im reflectMethod m.asMethod)())
}
def extractArgs(pss: List[List[Symbol]]): List[Option[Any]] =
pss.flatten.zipWithIndex map (p => getField(p._1.name.encoded) orElse getDefault(p._2))
val args = extractArgs(m.paramss)
if (args exists (!_.isDefined)) None
else Some(mm(args.flatten: _*).asInstanceOf[A])
}
// check the top-level tag
xml match {
case <plugin>{_*}</plugin> => extract[PluginDescription]()
case _ => None
}
}
XML has loadFile and save, it's too bad there seems to be no one-liner for Properties.
$ scala
Welcome to Scala version 2.10.0-RC5 (Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM, Java 1.7.0_06).
Type in expressions to have them evaluated.
Type :help for more information.
scala> import reflect.io._
import reflect.io._
scala> import java.util._
import java.util._
scala> import java.io.{StringReader, File=>JFile}
import java.io.{StringReader, File=>JFile}
scala> import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
scala> val p = new Properties
p: java.util.Properties = {}
scala> p load new StringReader(
| (new File(new JFile("t.properties"))).slurp)
scala> p.asScala
res2: scala.collection.mutable.Map[String,String] = Map(foo -> bar)
As it all boils down to serializing a map / object to a file, your choices are:
classic serialization to Bytecode
serialization to XML
serialization to JSON (easy using Jackson, or Lift-JSON)
use of a properties file (ugly, no utf-8 support)
serialization to a proprietary format (ugly, why reinvent the wheel)
I suggest to convert Map to Properties and vice versa. "*.properties" files are standard for storing configuration in Java world, why not use it for Scala?
The common way are *. properties, *.xml, since scala supports xml natively, so it would be easier using xml config then in java.
Related
I need to compile function and then evaluate it with different parameters of type List[Map[String, AnyRef]].
I have the following code that does not compile with such the type but compiles with simple type like List[Int].
I found that there are just certain implementations of Liftable in scala.reflect.api.StandardLiftables.StandardLiftableInstances
import scala.reflect.runtime.universe
import scala.reflect.runtime.universe._
import scala.tools.reflect.ToolBox
val tb = universe.runtimeMirror(getClass.getClassLoader).mkToolBox()
val functionWrapper =
"""
object FunctionWrapper {
def makeBody(messages: List[Map[String, AnyRef]]) = Map.empty
}""".stripMargin
val functionSymbol =
tb.define(tb.parse(functionWrapper).asInstanceOf[tb.u.ImplDef])
val list: List[Map[String, AnyRef]] = List(Map("1" -> "2"))
tb.eval(q"$functionSymbol.function($list)")
Getting compilation error for this, how can I make it work?
Error:(22, 38) Can't unquote List[Map[String,AnyRef]], consider using
... or providing an implicit instance of
Liftable[List[Map[String,AnyRef]]]
tb.eval(q"$functionSymbol.function($list)")
^
The problem comes not from complicated type but from the attempt to use AnyRef. When you unquote some literal, it means you want the infrastructure to be able to create a valid syntax tree to create an object that would exactly match the object you pass. Unfortunately this is obviously not possible for all objects. For example, assume that you've passed a reference to Thread.currentThread() as a part of the Map. How it could possible work? Compiler is just not able to recreate such a complicated object (not to mention making it the current thread). So you have two obvious alternatives:
Make you argument also a Tree i.e. something like this
def testTree() = {
val tb = universe.runtimeMirror(getClass.getClassLoader).mkToolBox()
val functionWrapper =
"""
| object FunctionWrapper {
|
| def makeBody(messages: List[Map[String, AnyRef]]) = Map.empty
|
| }
""".stripMargin
val functionSymbol =
tb.define(tb.parse(functionWrapper).asInstanceOf[tb.u.ImplDef])
//val list: List[Map[String, AnyRef]] = List(Map("1" -> "2"))
val list = q"""List(Map("1" -> "2"))"""
val res = tb.eval(q"$functionSymbol.makeBody($list)")
println(s"testTree = $res")
}
The obvious drawback of this approach is that you loose type safety at compile time and might need to provide a lot of context for the tree to work
Another approach is to not try to pass anything containing AnyRef to the compiler-infrastructure. It means you create some function-like Wrapper:
package so {
trait Wrapper {
def call(args: List[Map[String, AnyRef]]): Map[String, AnyRef]
}
}
and then make your generated code return a Wrapper instead of directly executing the logic and call the Wrapper from the usual Scala code rather than inside compiled code. Something like this:
def testWrapper() = {
val tb = universe.runtimeMirror(getClass.getClassLoader).mkToolBox()
val functionWrapper =
"""
|object FunctionWrapper {
| import scala.collection._
| import so.Wrapper /* <- here probably different package :) */
|
| def createWrapper(): Wrapper = new Wrapper {
| override def call(args: List[Map[String, AnyRef]]): Map[String, AnyRef] = Map.empty
| }
|}
| """.stripMargin
val functionSymbol = tb.define(tb.parse(functionWrapper).asInstanceOf[tb.u.ImplDef])
val list: List[Map[String, AnyRef]] = List(Map("1" -> "2"))
val tree: tb.u.Tree = q"$functionSymbol.createWrapper()"
val wrapper = tb.eval(tree).asInstanceOf[Wrapper]
val res = wrapper.call(list)
println(s"testWrapper = $res")
}
P.S. I'm not sure what are you doing but beware of performance issues. Scala is a hard language to compile and thus it might easily take more time to compile your custom code than to run it. If performance becomes an issue you might need to use some other methods such as full-blown macro-code-generation or at least caching of the compiled code.
I wrote a macro that parses JSON into a matching case class.
def parse(jsonTree: JsValue): BaseType = macro parserImpl
def parserImpl(c: blackbox.Context)(jsonTree: c.Tree) = {
import c.universe._
val q"$json" = jsonTree
val cases = List("X", "Y").map { caseClassName =>
val caseClass = c.parse(caseClassName)
val reader = c.parse(s"JSONHelp.${caseClassName}_reads")
val y = cq"""$caseClassName => (($json \ "config").validate[$caseClass]($reader)).get"""
println(showCode(y))
y
}.toList
val r =
q"""
import play.api.libs.json._
import JSONHelp._
println($json)
($json \ "type").as[String] match { case ..$cases }
"""
println(showCode(r))
r
}
The following is that code it generates (printed by the last println):
{
import play.api.libs.json._;
import JSONHelp._;
println(NodeParser.this.json);
NodeParser.this.json.\("type").as[String] match {
case "X" => NodeParser.this.json.\("config").validate[X](JSONHelp.X_reads).get
case "Y" => NodeParser.this.json.\("config").validate[Y](JSONHelp.Y_reads).get
}
}
The compilation of the subproject containing the macro definition works fine. But when I compile the project(using sbt 0.13.11 and scala 2.11.8) using the macro, I get the following error:
java.lang.NullPointerException
at play.routes.compiler.RoutesCompiler$GeneratedSource$.unapply(RoutesCompiler.scala:37)
at play.sbt.routes.RoutesCompiler$$anonfun$11$$anonfun$apply$2.isDefinedAt(RoutesCompiler.scala:180)
at play.sbt.routes.RoutesCompiler$$anonfun$11$$anonfun$apply$2.isDefinedAt(RoutesCompiler.scala:179)
at scala.Option.collect(Option.scala:250)
at play.sbt.routes.RoutesCompiler$$anonfun$11.apply(RoutesCompiler.scala:179)
at play.sbt.routes.RoutesCompiler$$anonfun$11.apply(RoutesCompiler.scala:178)
I'm not a user, but I see it seems to want tree positions with a source file:
val routesPositionMapper: Position => Option[Position] = position => {
position.sourceFile collect {
case GeneratedSource(generatedSource) => {
It's typical to use atPos(pos)(tree). You might assume the incoming tree.pos for synthetic trees.
I'm trying to wrap some blocking calls in Future.The return type is Seq[User] where User is a case class. The following just wouldn't compile with complaints of various overloaded versions being present. Any suggestions? I tried almost all the variations is Source.apply without any luck.
// All I want is Seq[User] => Future[Seq[User]]
def findByFirstName(firstName: String) = {
val users: Seq[User] = userRepository.findByFirstName(firstName)
val sink = Sink.fold[User, User](null)((_, elem) => elem)
val src = Source(users) // doesn't compile
src.runWith(sink)
}
First of all, I assume that you are using version 1.0 of akka-http-experimental since the API may changed from previous release.
The reason why your code does not compile is that the akka.stream.scaladsl.Source$.apply() requires
scala.collection.immutable.Seq instead of scala.collection.mutable.Seq.
Therefore you have to convert from mutable sequence to immutable sequence using to[T] method.
Document: akka.stream.scaladsl.Source
Additionally, as you see the document, Source$.apply() accepts ()=>Iterator[T] so you can also pass ()=>users.iterator as argument.
Since Sink.fold(...) returns the last evaluated expression, you can give an empty Seq() as the first argument, iterate over the users with appending the element to the sequence, and finally get the result.
However, there might be a better solution that can create a Sink which puts each evaluated expression into Seq, but I could not find it.
The following code works.
import akka.actor._
import akka.stream.ActorMaterializer
import akka.stream.scaladsl.{Source,Sink}
import scala.concurrent.ExecutionContext.Implicits.global
case class User(name:String)
object Main extends App{
implicit val system = ActorSystem("MyActorSystem")
implicit val materializer = ActorMaterializer()
val users = Seq(User("alice"),User("bob"),User("charlie"))
val sink = Sink.fold[Seq[User], User](Seq())(
(seq, elem) =>
{println(s"elem => ${elem} \t| seq => ${seq}");seq:+elem})
val src = Source(users.to[scala.collection.immutable.Seq])
// val src = Source(()=>users.iterator) // this also works
val fut = src.runWith(sink) // Future[Seq[User]]
fut.onSuccess({
case x=>{
println(s"result => ${x}")
}
})
}
The output of the code above is
elem => User(alice) | seq => List()
elem => User(bob) | seq => List(User(alice))
elem => User(charlie) | seq => List(User(alice), User(bob))
result => List(User(alice), User(bob), User(charlie))
If you need just Future[Seq[Users]] dont use akka streams but
futures
import scala.concurrent._
import ExecutionContext.Implicits.global
val session = socialNetwork.createSessionFor("user", credentials)
val f: Future[List[Friend]] = Future {
session.getFriends()
}
I'm trying to play with Scala's PlayFramework and am running into an issue with my build.sbt file. Specifically:
Pattern matching in val statements is not supported
Which is from the obvious:
val env = sys.props.getOrElse("ENV", default = "local")
val (someVal, otherVal) = env match {
case "local" => ("x","a")
case _ => //etc
}
Is there a way to use a match statement in the build.sbt file at all? The error says that it's not supported in val statements. Where is it actually supported?
Edit:
I've tried adding a method to a build.scala object as well, but even when I use plain if statements I still get the same "Pattern matching in val statements is not supported"
Build.scala:
import sbt._
import Keys._
object ExampleBuild extends Build {
def getEnvData(env: String) = {
if(env == "local") {
("c","q")
} else if (env == "other") {
("b","v")
} else {
("x","a")
}
}
}
And updated build.sbt:
val env = sys.props.getOrElse("ENV", default = "local")
val (someVar, otherVar) = ExampleBuild.getEnvData(env)
But to no avail.
The error is not caused by the match statement, but from this:
val (someVar, otherVar) = ...
which is a form of pattern matching (on tuples) not supported by sbt.
Here's a relevant comment from the SbtParser implementation
// Check No val (a,b) = foo or val a,b = foo as these are problematic to range positions and the WHOLE architecture.
You can work around this limitation by using a case class instead of a tuple.
in Build.scala
case class EnvData(someVar: String, otherVar: String)
in build.sbt
val envData = env match {
case "local" => EnvData("x", "a")
case _ => //etc
}
and then use it like envData.someVar, envData.otherVar and so on.
I was trying to pull environment variables into a scala script using java Iterators and / or Enumerations and realised that Dr Frankenstein might claim parentage, so I hacked the following from the ugly tree instead:
import java.util.Map.Entry
import System._
val propSet = getProperties().entrySet().toArray()
val props = (0 until propSet.size).foldLeft(Map[String, String]()){(m, i) =>
val e = propSet(i).asInstanceOf[Entry[String, String]]
m + (e.getKey() -> e.getValue())
}
For example to print the said same environment
props.keySet.toList.sortWith(_ < _).foreach{k =>
println(k+(" " * (30 - k.length))+" = "+props(k))
}
Please, please don't set about polishing this t$#d, just show me the scala gem that I'm convinced exists for this situation (i.e java Properties --> scala.Map), thanks in advance ;#)
Scala 2.10.3
import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
//Create a variable to store the properties in
val props = new Properties
//Open a file stream to read the file
val fileStream = new FileInputStream(new File(fileName))
props.load(fileStream)
fileStream.close()
//Print the contents of the properties file as a map
println(props.asScala.toMap)
Scala 2.7:
val props = Map() ++ scala.collection.jcl.Conversions.convertMap(System.getProperties).elements
Though that needs some typecasting. Let me work on it a bit more.
val props = Map() ++ scala.collection.jcl.Conversions.convertMap(System.getProperties).elements.asInstanceOf[Iterator[(String, String)]]
Ok, that was easy. Let me work on 2.8 now...
import scala.collection.JavaConversions.asMap
val props = System.getProperties() : scala.collection.mutable.Map[AnyRef, AnyRef] // or
val props = System.getProperties().asInstanceOf[java.util.Map[String, String]] : scala.collection.mutable.Map[String, String] // way too many repetitions of types
val props = asMap(System.getProperties().asInstanceOf[java.util.Map[String, String]])
The verbosity, of course, can be decreased with a couple of imports. First of all, note that Map will be a mutable map on 2.8. On the bright side, if you convert back the map, you'll get the original object.
Now, I have no clue why Properties implements Map<Object, Object>, given that the javadocs clearly state that key and value are String, but there you go. Having to typecast this makes the implicit option much less attractive. This being the case, the alternative is the most concise of them.
EDIT
Scala 2.8 just acquired an implicit conversion from Properties to mutable.Map[String,String], which makes most of that code moot.
In Scala 2.9.1 this is solved by implicit conversions inside collection.JavaConversions._ . The other answers use deprecated functions. The details are documented here. This is a relevant snippet out of that page:
scala> import collection.JavaConversions._
import collection.JavaConversions._
scala> import collection.mutable._
import collection.mutable._
scala> val jul: java.util.List[Int] = ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
jul: java.util.List[Int] = [1, 2, 3]
scala> val buf: Seq[Int] = jul
buf: scala.collection.mutable.Seq[Int] = ArrayBuffer(1, 2, 3)
scala> val m: java.util.Map[String, Int] = HashMap("abc" -> 1, "hello" -> 2)
m: java.util.Map[String,Int] = {hello=2, abc=1}
Getting from a mutable map to an immutable map is a matter of calling toMap on it.
In Scala 2.8.1 you can do it with asScalaMap(m : java.util.Map[A, B]) in a more concise way:
var props = asScalaMap(System.getProperties())
props.keySet.toList.sortWith(_ < _).foreach { k =>
println(k + (" " * (30 - k.length)) + " = " + props(k))
}
In Scala 2.13.2:
import scala.jdk.javaapi.CollectionConverters._
val props = asScala(System.getProperties)
Looks like in the most recent version of Scala (2.10.2 as of the time of this answer), the preferred way to do this is using the explicit .asScala from scala.collection.JavaConverters:
import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
val props = System.getProperties().asScala
assert(props.isInstanceOf[Map[String, String]])