In Scala a Set
is a function:
trait Set[A] extends (A => Boolean)
This make it impossible to have a covariant immutable Set
because type A
occurs in contravariant position. In contrast Seq
is not defined as a function. There is already some content about the question why Sets and Seqs are designed this way:
One answer says that the reason for this is the mathematical background. But this answer wasn't explained a little more. So, what are the concrete advantages to define a Set
as a function or what would be the disadvantages if it is implemented differently?
A function is a set of ordered pairs in which no two different ordered pairs have the same x -coordinate. An equation that produces such a set of ordered pairs defines a function.
Definition and UsageThe set() function creates a set object. The items in a set list are unordered, so it will appear in random order.
If every element of a set A is related with one and only one element of another set then this kind of relation qualifies as a function. A function is a special case of relation where no two ordered pairs can have the same first element.
Instead, sets serve one major purpose: sets let us define functions, and functions are really, really important! Functions are maps between sets that meet a few rules.
The set of type Set[A]
has to have a method that tests if an element of type A
is in the set. This method (apply
) has to have a parameter of type A
representing that element, and that parameter is in the contravariant position. This means that sets cannot be covariant in their type parameter A
. So - it's not the extending of the function interface that makes it impossible to have covariant immutable sets, it's the existence of the contravariant apply
method.
And for reasons of convenience, it makes sense to extend the Function1
interface to be able to pass sets around and treat them as functions.
By contrast, sequence abstraction doesn't have a method that tests if an element is in the sequence, it only has the indexing method - apply
takes an integer index, and returns the element at that index. Sequences are also defined as functions, but functions of type Int => A
(which are covariant in A
), not A => Boolean
, as sets.
If you want to know more about how type safety would be broken if sets were defined as covariant in their type parameter A
, see this example in which the set implementation does some writing to private members for reasons of caching the lookups (below @uV
is the annotation which disables variance checking and expensiveLookup
is meant to simulate a call to a computationally expensive check if an element is in the set):
import annotation.unchecked.{uncheckedVariance => uV}
trait Set[+A] {
def apply(elem: A @uV): Boolean
}
class CachingSet[+A >: Null] extends Set[A] {
private var lastLookup: (A @uV, Boolean) = (null, false)
private def expensiveLookup(elem: A @uV) = (elem, true)
def apply(elem: A @uV): Boolean = {
if (elem != lastLookup._1) lastLookup = expensiveLookup(elem)
lastLookup._2
}
def lastQueriedElement: A = lastLookup._1
}
object Main extends App {
val css = new CachingSet[String]
val csa: CachingSet[AnyRef] = css
csa.apply(new AnyRef)
val s: String = css.lastQueriedElement // you'll get a ClassCastException here
}
In contrast Seq is not defined as a function.
Not true.
Seq[T] extends (Int) => 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