Topic/tap each specialized #79
Conversation
| * collection" contract even though it seems unlikely to matter much in a | ||
| * collection with max size 1. | ||
| */ | ||
| class WithFilter(p: A => Boolean) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a reason for this not to be final?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I took the code of scala.Option from the 2.13.x branch. All your findings relate to that code. As @NthPortal points out below writing replacements for existing classes is not the way to go for this repository, so I'll provide an extension method instead (probably in a new PR, that's cleaner).
| */ | ||
| @SerialVersionUID(1234815782226070388L) // value computed by serialver for 2.11.2, annotation added in 2.11.4 | ||
| final case class Some[+A](value: A) extends Option[A] { | ||
| def get: A = value |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| def get: A = value | |
| override def get: A = value |
| */ | ||
| @SerialVersionUID(5066590221178148012L) // value computed by serialver for 2.11.2, annotation added in 2.11.4 | ||
| case object None extends Option[Nothing] { | ||
| def get: Nothing = throw new NoSuchElementException("None.get") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| def get: Nothing = throw new NoSuchElementException("None.get") | |
| override def get: Nothing = throw new NoSuchElementException("None.get") |
| * } | ||
| * }}} | ||
| */ | ||
| final def isDefined: Boolean = !isEmpty |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| final def isDefined: Boolean = !isEmpty | |
| final def isDefined: Boolean = this ne None |
|
@NthPortal Sorry, I overlooked in the README that changes/additions to existing library classes should be coded as extension methods. I will open a new PR with the specialized extension method, replacing this PR - I think it's cleaner that way... If I provide a specialized tapEach extension for Option, will this stay an extension in Scala 3.1 (which I wouldn't like too much) or will the specialized extension method be "merged" into scala.Option directly eventually? If the latter, would it be a good idea to add a comment how this could be done? |
|
to be honest, I'm suspicious the conversion to |
|
Superseded by PR #80 |
Add specialised version of
tapEachtoscala.Optionto preserve the type.The actual addition is in the second commit fb1f19a.
See also https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67017901/why-does-scala-option-tapeach-return-iterable-not-option?noredirect=1#comment118462412_67017901