trait A {
type T
def test(t: T): Unit
}
case class B[S <: A](a: S, t : S#T) {
def test() = a.test(t) // Error: type mismatch;
// found : B.this.t.type (with underlying type S#T)
// required: B.this.a.T
}
Am I wrong to expect the above to compile? Can my code be fixed?
Compiler has not sufficient evidence that S#T can be used as argument for test in concrete instance.
Consider this hypotecical example for weakened scala compiler
trait A2 extends A{
type T <: AnyRef
}
class A3 extends A2{
override type T = Integer
def test(t: Integer): Unit = println(t * 2)
}
So B[A2] should accept instance of A3 along with anything that is <: AnyRef while A3 needs exactly Integer for its own test implementation
You can catch concrete type in the definition of B, to make sure what type will be used
case class B[S <: A, ST](a: S {type T = ST}, t: ST) {
def test() = a.test(t)
}
I could come up with encodings (removed the type parameters for simplification):
scala> :paste
// Entering paste mode (ctrl-D to finish)
def test0(a: A)(t : a.T) = a.test(t)
abstract class B{
val a: A
val t: a.T
def test = a.test(t)
}
// Exiting paste mode, now interpreting.
test0: (a: A)(t: a.T)Unit
defined class B
This on the other hand didn't work with case classes arguments (nor classes' for that matter).
One of the reasons your encoding wouldn't work:
scala> def test1(a: A)(t : A#T) = a.test(t)
<console>:12: error: type mismatch;
found : t.type (with underlying type A#T)
required: a.T
def test1(a: A)(t : A#T) = a.test(t)
The important part is required: a.T (versus A#T). The test method in A doesn't take any T, it takes T this.T, or in other words, the T belonging to one particular instance of A.
Instead of a type projection you can use the dependent type a.T:
trait A {
type T
def test(t: T): Unit
}
case class B[S <: A](a: S)(t : a.T) {
def test() = a.test(t)
}
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