问题描述
有人可以解释为什么以下不起作用.当我执行 toSet
时,不知何故丢失了编译类型推断的一些信息,但我不明白为什么.
Can somebody explain why the following does not work. Somehow looses the compile some information for the type inference when i do toSet
, but i don't understand why.
scala> case class Foo(id: Int, name: String)
defined class Foo
scala> val ids = List(1,2,3)
ids: List[Int] = List(1, 2, 3)
scala> ids.toSet.map(Foo(_, "bar"))
<console>:11: error: missing parameter type for expanded function ((x$1) => Foo(x$1, "bar"))
ids.toSet.map(Foo(_, "bar"))
^
scala> ids.map(Foo(_, "bar")).toSet
res1: scala.collection.immutable.Set[Foo] = Set(Foo(1,bar), Foo(2,bar), Foo(3,bar))
推荐答案
假设我有以下内容:
trait Pet {
def name: String
}
case class Dog(name: String) extends Pet
val someDogs: List[Dog] = List(Dog("Fido"), Dog("Rover"), Dog("Sam"))
Set
的类型参数不是协变的,但 List
是协变的.这意味着如果我有一个 List[Dog]
我也有一个 List[Pet]
,但是一个 Set[Dog]
是 不是Set[Pet]
.为方便起见,Scala 允许您在从 List
(或其他集合类型)到 Set
的转换期间通过在 上提供显式类型参数进行向上转换设置
.当你写 val a = ids.toSet;a.map(...)
,这个类型参数是推断出来的,你没问题.另一方面,当您编写 ids.toSet.map(...)
时,它不会被推断出来,因此您很不走运.
Set
isn't covariant in its type parameter, but List
is. This means if I have a List[Dog]
I also have a List[Pet]
, but a Set[Dog]
is not a Set[Pet]
. For the sake of convenience, Scala allows you to upcast during a conversion from a List
(or other collection types) to a Set
by providing an explicit type parameter on toSet
. When you write val a = ids.toSet; a.map(...)
, this type parameter is inferred and you're fine. When you write ids.toSet.map(...)
, on the other hand, it's not inferred, and you're out of luck.
这允许以下工作:
scala> val twoPetSet: Set[Pet] = someDogs.toSet.take(2)
twoPetSet: Set[Pet] = Set(Dog(Fido), Dog(Rover))
虽然没有:
scala> val allDogSet: Set[Dog] = someDogs.toSet
allDogSet: Set[Dog] = Set(Dog(Fido), Dog(Rover), Dog(Sam))
scala> val twoPetSet: Set[Pet] = allDogSet.take(2)
<console>:14: error: type mismatch;
found : scala.collection.immutable.Set[Dog]
required: Set[Pet]
Note: Dog <: Pet, but trait Set is invariant in type A.
You may wish to investigate a wildcard type such as `_ <: Pet`. (SLS 3.2.10)
val twoPetSet: Set[Pet] = allDogSet.take(2)
^
这值得混淆吗?我不知道.但这有点道理,这是 Collections API 设计者为 toSet
做出的决定,所以我们坚持了下去.
Is this worth the confusion? I don't know. But it kind of makes sense, and it's the decision the Collections API designers made for toSet
, so we're stuck with it.
这篇关于toSet 和类型推断的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持!