Consider the following typical Scala 'pimp' code:
class PimpedA(a:A){
def pimp() = "hi"
}
implicit def pimpA(a:A) = new PimpedA(a)
new A(){
pimp() //<--- does not compile
}
However, changing it to:
new A(){
this.pimp()
}
Makes it work.
Shouldn't it be the same to the Scala compiler?
EDIT : Is there any solution that can make it work without having to add the this.?
Not at all. For it to work, pimp needs to be either an object or an imported member of a value, and it is neither. A class has an "implicit" import this._. It has not a mechanism that auto-prepends this to stuff to see if it compiles.
In this case you should give compiler a hint that pimp() is not a random function. When you write
this.pimp()
compiler know there isn't pimp function on class A so it's an error and before giving up it searches implicit conversion in scope and finds it.
pimpA(this).pimp()
And when you just call pimp() compiler doesn't know what object to pass to the pimpA(a: A) implicit function.
UPDATE
It is hard to understand what is your goal. I can only suggest to make PimpedA a typeclass (Pimp[T] in this example).
trait Pimp[T] {
def action(p: T): String
}
implicit object PimpA extends Pimp[A] {
override def action(p: A) = "some actions related to A"
}
def pimp[T: Pimp](p: T) = implicitly[Pimp[T]].action(p)
class A {
val foo = pimp(this)
}
scala> new A foo
res2: String = some actions related to A
Related
I have the following object for making a conversion of an object ParsedItemDocument to a json String. I should note that ParsedItemDocument is a trait. My problem is that the implicit conversion that is called on the second snippet is not recognized by the compiler. Is there anything more that needs to be done for the implicit conversion to work?
import scala.language.implicitConversions
import wikidataParser.ParsedItemDocument
object Converters {
def toJson(obj: Any): String = {
val mapper = new ObjectMapper()
mapper.registerModule(DefaultScalaModule)
val out = new StringWriter
mapper.writeValue(out, obj)
return out.toString()
}
implicit def parsedItemDocumentToJsonString
(item: ParsedItemDocument): String = {
Converters.toJson(item)
}
}
Now, I use the following code-snippet in my code
import tools.Converters._
import wikidataParser.ParsedItemDocument
class WikipediaRankingTester2 extends FlatSpec {
"It" should "do something" in {
val jsonrdd:RDD[String]=rankedItems.map(t:Long,ParsedItemDocument)=>
t._2.parsedItemDocumentToJsonString)//compilation error here
}
}
You are mixing up implicit conversions and implicit classes.
If you want to use parsedItemDocumentToJsonString as a "method" of an object of type ParsedItemDocument, then you would need to define your implicit as
implicit class JSONParsing(item: ParsedItemDocument): String {
def parsedItemDocumentToJsonString = Converters.toJson(item)
}
If you declare it as an implicit conversion, as you did, then it means that you can call any methods of String on an object of type ParsedItemDocument, as the object will be implicitly converted to a String through the implicit method.
Also, it is not great practice to declare an entire implicit class / conversion, unless you 1) cannot add it to the original class, or 2) will be reusing the conversion very often, and it would save great amounts of code/readability. This does not seem to be the case here, as you are only wrapping in Converters.toJSON, which is not very verbose, and jsut as readable.
PS: your syntax in your "map" is wrong, the right syntax would be
val jsonrdd = rankedItems.map(t => t._2.parsedItemDocumentToJsonString)
If your implicit is working this should do it:
rankedItems.map(t => t._2)
You can test this by making the call explicit
rankedItems.map(t => parsedItemDocumentToJsonString(t._2))
If you want to add an extra method to a ParsedItemDocument you could use an implicit class, I don't think you need it but your code looks a bit that way.
The following code does not compile:
import scala.language.implicitConversions
trait Base {
class Wrp[+T](val v: T) // wrapper / internal representation
}
trait BooleanOps extends Base {
// implicit conversion
implicit def lift2BooleanOpsCls(x: Boolean): BooleanOpsCls =
new BooleanOpsCls(new Wrp[Boolean](x))
class BooleanOpsCls(wx: Wrp[Boolean]) {
def ||(wy: =>Wrp[Boolean]): Wrp[Boolean] = new Wrp[Boolean](wx.v || wy.v)
}
}
trait MyExample extends BooleanOps {
// test method
def foo(): Wrp[Boolean] = {
val ret: Wrp[Boolean] = false || new Wrp[Boolean](true)
ret
}
}
Output:
MyExample.scala:18: error: type mismatch;
found : MyExample.this.Wrp[Boolean]
required: Boolean
val ret: Wrp[Boolean] = false || new Wrp[Boolean](true)
^
But if I:
1) put the class Wrp outside of Base
or
2) move the body of BooleanOps to MyExample
everything compiles.
Why does not the original example work? If you have some insight in this behavior, help would be appreciated. Thank you.
One issue is the call-by-name nature of the argument in the def ||(wy: =>Wrp[Boolean])
if you rewite it to def ||(wy: Wrp[Boolean]) it works
but I agree that it is weird that it works if you move around Wrp or BooleanOpsCls! Intended or bug of implicit resolution??
The original example will work if you rename the || method. The compiler finds the false.||() method and doesn't bother to look for an implicit that might also work there.
The problem is that there is no single class called Wrp (ignore the T for a moment) -- Base does not define Wrp but rather defines a named subclass of each and every concrete class that extends Base. The implicits are a red herring, too. The error that's the giveaway is the mention of MyExample.this.Wrp -- remember that there is no such class even as MyExample -- val x = new MyExample would have type Object with MyExample.
I am using a library which has a class that has a generic type that can be quite complicated. I need to write a method that takes a parameter with the generic type that a val of the library class has, and I would like to avoid having to write out the type in the method signature. I thought I might be able to create an implicit class which adds a type to the val that I could use in the method signature, kind of like:
// This comes from a library and can't be changed
case class LibraryClass[A](a: A)
//----------------------------------
object MyCode {
val thing = LibraryClass(3)
implicit class LibraryClassWithType[A](lc: LibraryClass[A]) {
type TheType = A
}
def doStuff(something: thing.TheType): Unit = {
println(something)
}
}
This does not compile (TheType is not a member of LibraryClass). But if I wrap it in the class myself, it works
val thingWithType = LibraryClassWithType(thing)
def doStuff(something: thingWithType.TheType): Unit = {
println(something)
}
Is there something I am missing that will make this work, or is this kind of implicit conversion not valid Scala?
I haven't been able to do this sort of thing with implicits, but I have had to do something similar where I just instantiated these sorts of type holders:
case class LibraryClass[A](a: A)
object MyCode {
val thing = LibraryClass(3)
class HigherTypeHolder[A,F[A]](a: F[A]) {
type AT = A
}
val th = new HigherTypeHolder(thing)
def doStuff(something: th.AT): Unit = {
println(something)
}
}
You can do what (I think) you want like this:
implicit val thing = LibraryClass(3)
def doStuff[A](something: A)(implicit lc: LibraryClass[A])
What I don't understand is why this needs to be so complicated. Why not for example stick with your second approach, without implicits, that works, or why not just do
def doStuff[A](something: A) to begin with?
I'm trying to figure out how to .clone my own objects, in Scala.
This is for a simulation so mutable state is a must, and from that arises the whole need for cloning. I'll clone a whole state structure before moving the simulation time ahead.
This is my current try:
abstract trait Cloneable[A] {
// Seems we cannot declare the prototype of a copy constructor
//protected def this(o: A) // to be defined by the class itself
def myClone= new A(this)
}
class S(var x: String) extends Cloneable[S] {
def this(o:S)= this(o.x) // for 'Cloneable'
def toString= x
}
object TestX {
val s1= new S("say, aaa")
println( s1.myClone )
}
a. Why does the above not compile. Gives:
error: class type required but A found
def myClone= new A(this)
^
b. Is there a way to declare the copy constructor (def this(o:A)) in the trait, so that classes using the trait would be shown to need to provide one.
c. Is there any benefit from saying abstract trait?
Finally, is there a way better, standard solution for all this?
I've looked into Java cloning. Does not seem to be for this. Also Scala copy is not - it's only for case classes and they shouldn't have mutable state.
Thanks for help and any opinions.
Traits can't define constructors (and I don't think abstract has any effect on a trait).
Is there any reason it needs to use a copy constructor rather than just implementing a clone method? It might be possible to get out of having to declare the [A] type on the class, but I've at least declared a self type so the compiler will make sure that the type matches the class.
trait DeepCloneable[A] { self: A =>
def deepClone: A
}
class Egg(size: Int) extends DeepCloneable[Egg] {
def deepClone = new Egg(size)
}
object Main extends App {
val e = new Egg(3)
println(e)
println(e.deepClone)
}
http://ideone.com/CS9HTW
It would suggest a typeclass based approach. With this it is possible to also let existing classes be cloneable:
class Foo(var x: Int)
trait Copyable[A] {
def copy(a: A): A
}
implicit object FooCloneable extends Copyable[Foo] {
def copy(foo: Foo) = new Foo(foo.x)
}
implicit def any2Copyable[A: Copyable](a: A) = new {
def copy = implicitly[Copyable[A]].copy(a)
}
scala> val x = new Foo(2)
x: Foo = Foo#8d86328
scala> val y = x.copy
y: Foo = Foo#245e7588
scala> x eq y
res2: Boolean = false
a. When you define a type parameter like the A it gets erased after the compilation phase.
This means that the compiler uses type parameters to check that you use the correct types, but the resulting bytecode retains no information of A.
This also implies that you cannot use A as a real class in code but only as a "type reference", because at runtime this information is lost.
b & c. traits cannot define constructor parameters or auxiliary constructors by definition, they're also abstract by definition.
What you can do is define a trait body that gets called upon instantiation of the concrete implementation
One alternative solution is to define a Cloneable typeclass. For more on this you can find lots of blogs on the subject, but I have no suggestion for a specific one.
scalaz has a huge part built using this pattern, maybe you can find inspiration there: you can look at Order, Equal or Show to get the gist of it.
I write
object MyString {
implicit def stringToMyString(s: String) = new MyString(s)
}
class MyString(str: String) {
def camelize = str.split("_").map(_.capitalize).mkString
override def toString = str
}
object Parse {
def main(args: Array[String]) {
val x = "active_record".camelize
// ...
}
}
in my program. This causes a compiling error. After I inserted
import MyString.stringToMyString
Then it works.
From Odersky's Programming in Scala I got that implicit conversion in the companion object of the source or expected target types don't need to be imported.
implicit conversion in the companion
object of the source or expected
target types don't need to be
imported.
True enough. Now, the method camelize is defined on the class MyString, and, indeed, there is an implicit conversion to MyString inside its object companion. However, there is nothing in the code telling the compiler that MyString is the expected target type.
If, instead, you wrote this:
val x = ("active_record": MyString).camelize
then it would work, because the compiler would know you expect "active_record" to be a MyString, making it look up the implicit conversion inside object MyString.
This might look a bit restrictive, but it actually works in a number of places. Say, for instance, you had:
class Fraction(num: Int, denom: Int) {
...
def +(b: Fraction) = ...
...
}
And then you had a code like this:
val x: Fraction = ...
val y = x + 5
Now, x does have a + method, whose expected type is Fraction. So the compiler would look, here, for an implicit conversion from Int to Fraction inside the object Fraction (and inside the object Int, if there was one, since that's the source type).
In this situation you need the import because the compiler doesn't know where you pulled out the camelize method from. If the type is clear, it will compile without import:
object Parse {
def foo(s: MyString) = s.camelize
def main(args: Array[String]) {
val x = foo("active_record")
println(x.toString)
}
}
See Pimp my library pattern, based on Martin's article:
Note that it is not possible to put defs at the top level, so you can’t define an implicit conversion with global scope. The solution is to place the def inside an object, and then import it, i.e.
object Implicits {
implicit def listExtensions[A](xs : List[A]) = new ListExtensions(xs)
}
And then at the top of each source file, along with your other imports:
import Implicits._
I tried the Rational class example in Programming in Scala book, put an implicit method in its companion object:
object Rational {
implicit def intToRational(num: Int) =
new Rational(num)
}
but the code
2 + new Rational(1, 2)
does not work. For the conversion to happen, the single identifier rule applies, i.e., you need to import the explicit method into scope even though it is defined in the companion object.