I'm trying to implement a few structures from Okasaki's book in Scala, and in tests try to keep the actual tests in the base class, only using subclasses to provide the instance-under-test.
For example, a test for unbalanced (tree) set looks as follows:
class UnbalancedSetSpec
extends SetSpec(new UnbalancedSet[Int])
with IntElements
where
abstract class SetSpec[E, S](val set: Set[E, S]) extends Specification with ScalaCheck {
implicit def elements: Arbitrary[E]
// ...
private def setFrom(es: Seq[E]): S = es.foldRight(set.empty)(set.insert)
}
Now sometimes I want to specialise the child spec, e.g.
class RedBlackSetSpec
extends SetSpec(new RedBlackSet[Int])
with IntElements {
"fromOrdList" should {
"be balanced" ! prop { (a: List[Int]) =>
val s = RedBlackSet.fromOrdList(a.sorted)
set.isValid(s) should beTrue
}
}
}
it fails because there's no method isValid
on Set[E, S]
— it's defined in RedBlackSet[E]
. But if I go ahead and change SetSpec[E, S](val set: Set[E, S])
to SetSpec[E, S, SES <: Set[E, S]](val set: SES)
, this particular problem disappears, but the code still fails to compile:
Error:(7, 11) inferred type arguments [Nothing,Nothing,okasaki.RedBlackSet[Int]] do not conform to class SetSpec's type parameter bounds [E,S,SES <: okasaki.Set[E,S]]
extends SetSpec(new RedBlackSet[Int])
^
Error:(7, 11) inferred type arguments [Nothing,Nothing,okasaki.UnbalancedSet[Int]] do not conform to class SetSpec's type parameter bounds [E,S,SES <: okasaki.Set[E,S]]
extends SetSpec(new UnbalancedSet[Int])
^
The definition of RedBlackSet
is as follows:
package okasaki
class RedBlackSet[E](implicit ord: Ordering[E]) extends Set[E, RBTree[E]] {
so I would expect E
to be inferred as Int
rather than Nothing
, and S
as RBTree[Int]
— but it doesn't happen.
class RedBlackSetSpec
extends SetSpec[Int, RedBlackSet.RBTree[Int], RedBlackSet[Int]](new RedBlackSet[Int])
with IntElements {
and
class UnbalancedSetSpec
extends SetSpec[Int, BinaryTree[Int], UnbalancedSet[Int]](new UnbalancedSet[Int])
with IntElements
work fine, but look ugly.
I'm struggling to understand why E
and S
are not inferred here. Any hints?
Most Scala generic classes are collections, such as the immutable List, Queue, Set, Map, or their mutable equivalents, and Stack. Collections are containers of zero or more objects. We also have generic containers that aren't so obvious at first.
Generics also provide type safety (ensuring that an operation is being performed on the right type of data before executing that operation). Hierarchical classifications are allowed by Inheritance. Superclass is a class that is inherited. The subclass is a class that does inherit.
To use a generic class, put the type in the square brackets in place of A . The instance stack can only take Ints. However, if the type argument had subtypes, those could be passed in: Scala 2.
A Generic class simply means that the items or functions in that class can be generalized with the parameter(example T) to specify that we can add any type as a parameter in place of T like Integer, Character, String, Double or any other user-defined type.
This is actually a well-known problem with Scala type inference: it can't infer SES
"first" and use it to infer E
and S
. One solution comes to mind:
class RedBlackSetSpec(override val set: RedBlackSet[Int]) extends SetSpec(set) with IntElements {
def this() = this(new RedBlackSet[Int])
...
}
It becomes less ugly if you make set
in SetSpec
an abstract val
instead of a constructor argument, but with a slight tradeoff in cases you don't need to specialize. I think there should be a better one, but this should work.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With