I've created a Kotlin equivalent of TypeReference<T> like so:
abstract class TypeReference<T> : Comparable<T> {
val type: Type get() = getGenericType()
val arguments: List<Type> get() = getTypeArguments()
final override fun compareTo(other: T): Int {
return 0
}
private fun getGenericType(): Type {
val superClass = javaClass.genericSuperclass
check(superClass !is Class<*>) {
"TypeReference constructed without actual type information."
}
return (superClass as ParameterizedType).actualTypeArguments[0]
}
private fun getTypeArguments(): List<Type> {
val type = getGenericType()
return if (type is ParameterizedType) {
type.actualTypeArguments.toList()
} else emptyList()
}
}
In order to obtain Class<*> of the generic type and its arguments, I've also created the following extension function (and this is where I believe the problem lies, since this is where the stack trace fails).
fun Type.toClass(): Class<*> = when (this) {
is ParameterizedType -> rawType.toClass()
is Class<*> -> this
else -> Class.forName(typeName)
}
I'm unit testing this like so:
#Test
fun `TypeReference should correctly identify the List of BigDecimal type`() {
// Arrange
val expected = List::class.java
val expectedParameter1 = BigDecimal::class.java
val typeReference = object : TypeReference<List<BigDecimal>>() {}
// Act
val actual = typeReference.type.toClass()
val actualParameter1 = typeReference.arguments[0].toClass()
// Assert
assertEquals(expected, actual)
assertEquals(expectedParameter1, actualParameter1)
}
The problem I think, lies in the extension function else -> Class.forName(typeName) as it throws:
java.lang.ClassNotFoundException: ? extends java.math.BigDecimal
Is there a better way to obtain the Class<*> of a Type, even when they're generic type parameters?
You need to add is WildcardType -> ... branch to your when-expression to handle types like ? extends java.math.BigDecimal (Kotlin equivalent is out java.math.BigDecimal), ?(Kotlin equivalent is *), ? super Integer(Kotlin equivalent is in java.math.Integer):
fun Type.toClass(): Class<*> = when (this) {
is ParameterizedType -> rawType.toClass()
is Class<*> -> this
is WildcardType -> upperBounds.singleOrNull()?.toClass() ?: Any::class.java
else -> Class.forName(typeName)
}
Note that in this implementation single upper bound types will be resolved as its upper bound, but all other wildcard types (including multiple upper bounds types) will be resolved as Class<Object>
https://github.com/pluses/ktypes
val typeReference = object : TypeReference<List<BigDecimal>>() {}
val superType = typeReference::class.createType().findSuperType(TypeReference::class)!!
println(superType.arguments.first())// List<java.math.BigDecimal>
println(superType.arguments.first().type?.arguments?.first())// java.math.BigDecimal
Related
I have a situation where I need to create a copy of data class object. I don't know in advance which of the many data classes I have will come in into the function. I do know, however, that only data classes will be used as input to this function.
This is what didn't work:
fun doSomething(obj: Any): Any {
obj.copy(...) // <- there's no 'copy' on Any
...
}
This is what I really like to do:
fun doSomething(obj: KAnyDataClass): KAnyDataClass {
obj.copy(...) // <- works, data classes have a 'copy' method
...
}
I'm not a Kotlin developer, but it looks like the language does not support dynamic dispatch or traits. You might find success with the dynamic type, which just turns off the type-checker so it won't yell at you for using a method that it doesn't know about. However this opens up the possibility of a runtime error if you pass an argument that actually doesn't have that method.
There is no class or interface for data classes, but we know from the documentation of data classes that there are derived functions componentN and copy in each data class.
We can use that knowledge to write an abstract copy method that calls the copy method of a given arbitrary data class using reflection:
fun <T : Any> copy(data: T, vararg override: Pair<Int, Any?>): T {
val kClass = data::class
if (!kClass.isData) error("expected a data class")
val copyFun = kClass.functions.first { it.name == "copy" }
checkParameters(override, kClass)
val vals = determineComponentValues(copyFun, kClass, override, data)
#Suppress("UNCHECKED_CAST")
return copyFun.call(data, *vals) as T
}
/** check if override of parameter has the right type and nullability */
private fun <T : Any> checkParameters(
override: Array<out Pair<Int, Any?>>,
kClass: KClass<out T>
) {
override.forEach { (index, value) ->
val expectedType = kClass.functions.first { it.name == "component${index + 1}" }.returnType
if (value == null) {
if (!kClass.functions.first { it.name == "component${index + 1}" }.returnType.isMarkedNullable) {
error("value for parameter $index is null but parameter is not nullable")
}
} else {
if (!expectedType.jvmErasure.isSuperclassOf(value::class))
error("wrong type for parameter $index: expected $expectedType but was ${value::class}")
}
}
}
/** determine for each componentN the value from override or data element */
private fun <T : Any> determineComponentValues(
copyFun: KFunction<*>,
kClass: KClass<out T>,
override: Array<out Pair<Int, Any?>>,
data: T
): Array<Any?> {
val vals = (1 until copyFun.parameters.size)
.map { "component$it" }
.map { name -> kClass.functions.first { it.name == name } }
.mapIndexed { index, component ->
override.find { it.first == index }.let { if (it !== null) it.second else component.call(data) }
}
.toTypedArray()
return vals
}
Since this copy function is generic and not for a specific data class, it is not possible to specify overloads in the usual way, but I tried to support it in another way.
Let's say we have a data class and element
data class Example(
val a: Int,
val b: String,
)
val example: Any = Example(1, "x")
We can create a copy of example with copy(example) that has the same elements as the original.
If we want to override the first element, we cannot write copy(example, a = 2), but we can write copy(example, 0 to 2), saying that we want to override the first component with value 2.
Analogously we can write copy(example, 0 to 3, 1 to "y") to specify that we want to change the first and the second component.
I am not sure if this works for all cases since I just wrote it, but it should be a good start to work with.
I have a function in Kotlin which takes a particular string as input. Depending on the input, I want to create a variable of a specific type and do some computations on it.
For example,
fun compute(input: String): Any{
if(input=="2d"){
var point: Point2D;// Points2D - x: int, y: int
//initilize and do some computations
return point.findDistanceFromOrigin()
}else if(input=="2d-1"){
var point: Point2DWithP1AsOrigin;// Point2DWithP1AsOrigin - x: int, y: int
//initilize and do some computations
return point.findDistanceFromOrigin()
}else if(input=="2d-2"){
var point: Point2DWithP2AsOrigin;
//initilize and do some computations
return point.findDistanceFromOrigin()
}
.
.
.
}
You can see in the above example, I want to initilize the type of point depending on the input and do computation and return.
All the if-else conditions have the same code except for the definition of the variable. How can I put all this in a single block with something like this:
var point: if(input=="2d) Point2D::class else if(input=="2d-1") Point2DWithP1AsOrigin::class.....
How can I do that?
You could do something like this
fun compute(input: String): Any{
val point: MyPoint = when(input) {
"2d" -> Point2D()
"2d-1" -> Point2DWithP1AsOrigin()
"2d-2" -> Point2DWithP2AsOrigin()
else -> Point2D() //fallback is necessary
}
//initilize and do some computations
return point.findDistanceFromOrigin()
}
But then it's essential that all those classes share the same interface. Because they need to have the same methods in order to do the same operations on them.
For example like this:
class Point2D : MyPoint {
override fun findDistanceFromOrigin() = 5
}
class Point2DWithP1AsOrigin : MyPoint{
override fun findDistanceFromOrigin() = 6
}
class Point2DWithP2AsOrigin : MyPoint{
override fun findDistanceFromOrigin() = 7
}
interface MyPoint {
fun findDistanceFromOrigin() : Int
}
You can store constructor references and then invoke required one
fun main() {
val constructors = mapOf(
"2d" to ::Point2D,
"2d-1" to ::Point2DWithP1AsOrigin,
"2d-2" to ::Point2DWithP2AsOrigin,
)
val type = "2d-2"
val constructor = constructors[type] ?: throw IllegalArgumentException("$type not supported")
val point = constructor()
println(point::class)
}
Output
class Point2DWithP2AsOrigin
I am trying to create a function that has two generic types: one reified, and another derived from the context of its usage (since it is an extension function):
inline fun <reified E, A> Either<Throwable, A>.bypassLeft(transformation: Throwable.() -> A): Either<Throwable, A> =
when (this) {
is Either.Left -> when (value) {
is E -> value.transformation().right()
else -> this
}
else -> this
}
The idea would be to call the function just mentioning the reified type, something like:
a.bypassLeft<NoResultException> { "" }
In which "a" is an object of type Either<Throwable,String>
But the compiler is not letting me go away with it, and requires me to specify both generic types, instead of deriving the second one form the object calling the function.
It seemed quite a reasonable thing to be possible, but maybe I am wrong...
Is this possible to achieve? If so, what am I doing wrong?
It's not currently possible with a function to ascribe a single type argument and leave the other inferred. You can achieve what you want if you type the lambda arguments by changing your implementation to not use a receiver type.
I threw in there an additional impl that shows how type args can also be partially applied with a class or other surrounding scope.
import arrow.core.Either
import arrow.core.right
inline fun <reified E : Throwable, A> Either<Throwable, A>.bypassLeft(
transformation: (E) -> A //changed to regular arg not receiver
): Either<Throwable, A> =
when (this) {
is Either.Left -> when (val v = value) { //name locally for smart cast
is E -> transformation(v).right()
else -> this
}
else -> this
}
class Catch<A>(val f: () -> A) { //alternative impl with partial type app
inline fun <reified E : Throwable> recover(
recover: (E) -> A
): Either<Throwable, A> =
Either.catch(f).fold(
{
if (it is E) Either.Right(recover(it))
else Either.Left(it)
},
{
Either.Right(it)
}
)
}
suspend fun main() {
val x: Either<Throwable, Int> = Either.Left(StackOverflowError())
val recovered = x.bypassLeft {
s: StackOverflowError -> //here infers E
0 // here infers A
}
println(recovered) // Either.Right(0)
val notRecovered: Either<Throwable, Int> =
Catch {
throw NumberFormatException()
1
}.recover<StackOverflowError> { 0 }
println(notRecovered) // Either.Left(java.lang.NumberFormatException)
}
This is possible as of Kotlin v1.7.0 with the underscore operator.
The underscore operator _ can be used for type arguments. Use it to automatically infer a type of the argument when other types are explicitly specified:
interface Foo<T>
fun <T, F : Foo<T>> bar() {}
fun baz() {
bar<_, Foo<String>>() // T = String is inferred
}
In your example, it would be possible like this:
a.bypassLeft<NoResultException, _> { "" }
In javascript we can do something like this
function putritanjungsari(data){
console.log(data.name)
}
let data = {
name:"putri",
div:"m4th"
}
putritanjungsari(data)
In kotlin, i'am creating a function that accept an object as parameter then read it's properties later, how to do that in kotlin that targeting JVM?
If I understood your question correct, you are trying to have a variable that associates keys with some value or undefined(null in kt) if none are found. You are searching for a Map
If you don't know what types you want, you can make a map of type Any? So
Map<String, Any?>
Which is also nullable
Map<String, Any>
If you don't want nullables
Your code for example:
fun putritanjungsari(data: Map<String, Any?>){
print(data["name"])
}
val data: Map<String, Any?> =mapOf(
"name" to "putri",
"div" to "m4th"
)
putritanjungsari(data)
Note that you can't add new keys or edit any data here, the default map is immutable. There is MutableMap (which is implemented the same, only it has a method to put new data)
You can apply the property design pattern to solve your problem.
Here is its implementation in Kotlin:
interface DynamicProperty<T> {
fun cast(value: Any?): T
fun default(): T
companion object {
inline fun <reified T> fromDefaultSupplier(crossinline default: () -> T) =
object : DynamicProperty<T> {
override fun cast(value: Any?): T = value as T
override fun default(): T = default()
}
inline operator fun <reified T> invoke(default: T) = fromDefaultSupplier { default }
inline fun <reified T> required() = fromDefaultSupplier<T> {
throw IllegalStateException("DynamicProperty isn't initialized")
}
inline fun <reified T> nullable() = DynamicProperty<T?>(null)
}
}
operator fun <T> DynamicProperty<T>.invoke(value: T) = DynamicPropertyValue(this, value)
data class DynamicPropertyValue<T>(val property: DynamicProperty<T>, val value: T)
class DynamicObject(vararg properties: DynamicPropertyValue<*>) {
private val properties = HashMap<DynamicProperty<*>, Any?>().apply {
properties.forEach { put(it.property, it.value) }
}
operator fun <T> get(property: DynamicProperty<T>) =
if (properties.containsKey(property)) property.cast(properties[property])
else property.default()
operator fun <T> set(property: DynamicProperty<T>, value: T) = properties.put(property, value)
operator fun <T> DynamicProperty<T>.minus(value: T) = set(this, value)
}
fun dynamicObj(init: DynamicObject.() -> Unit) = DynamicObject().apply(init)
You can define your properties these ways:
val NAME = DynamicProperty.required<String>() // throws exceptions on usage before initialization
val DIV = DynamicProperty.nullable<String>() // has nullable type String?
val IS_ENABLED = DynamicProperty(true) // true by default
Now you can use them:
fun printObjName(obj: DynamicObject) {
println(obj[NAME])
}
val data = dynamicObj {
NAME - "putri"
DIV - "m4th"
}
printObjName(data)
// throws exception because name isn't initialized
printObjName(DynamicObject(DIV("m4th"), IS_ENABLED(false)))
Reasons to use DynamicObject instead of Map<String, Any?>:
Type-safety (NAME - 3 and NAME(true) will not compile)
No casting is required on properties usage
You can define what the program should do when a property isn't initialized
Kotlin is statically typed language, so it required a param type to be precisely defined or unambiguously inferred (Groovy, for instance, addresses the case by at least two ways). But for JS interoperability Kotlin offers dynamic type.
Meanwhile, in your particular case you can type data structure to kt's Map and do not argue with strict typing.
You have to use Any and after that, you have to cast your object, like this
private fun putritanjungsari(data : Any){
if(data is Mydata){
var data = data as? Mydata
data.name
}
}
Just for the sake of inspiration. In Kotlin, you can create ad hoc objects:
val adHoc = object {
var x = 1
var y = 2
}
println(adHoc.x + adHoc.y)
I've been trying to create a Kotlin DSL for creating GSON JsonObjects with a JSON-like syntax. My builder looks like this
import com.google.gson.JsonArray
import com.google.gson.JsonElement
import com.google.gson.JsonObject
import com.google.gson.JsonPrimitive
class JsonBuilder(builder: JsonBuilder.() -> Unit) {
init {
builder()
}
val result = JsonObject()
infix fun String.to(property: Number) = result.addProperty(this, property)
infix fun String.to(property: Char) = result.addProperty(this, property)
infix fun String.to(property: Boolean) = result.addProperty(this, property)
infix fun String.to(property: String) = result.addProperty(this, property)
infix fun String.to(property: JsonElement) = result.add(this, property)
infix fun String.to(properties: Collection<JsonElement>) {
val arr = JsonArray()
properties.forEach(arr::add)
result.add(this, arr)
}
operator fun String.invoke(builder: JsonObject.() -> Unit) {
val obj = JsonObject()
obj.builder()
result.add(this, obj)
}
}
fun json(builder: JsonBuilder.() -> Unit) = JsonBuilder(builder).result
And my test looks like this
fun main() {
val json = json {
"name" to "value"
"obj" {
"int" to 1
}
"true" to true
}
println(json)
}
However, upon execution it causes a NullPointerException pointing to the first String extension function used, which I don't find very descriptive as I don't see anything being nullable up to that point. Moreover, I don't see how it really differs from the regular execution which of course doesn't cause a NPE.
val json = JsonObject()
json.addProperty("name", "value")
val obj = JsonObject()
obj.addProperty("int", 1)
json.add("obj", obj)
json.addProperty("true", true)
My question is what's exactly causing the exception (and how to prevent it).
The issue is that you've specified the initialiser block earlier than the result object, causing it to be null when you come to use it - this can be visualised by the following (decompiled output of your code).
public JsonBuilder(#NotNull Function1 builder) {
Intrinsics.checkParameterIsNotNull(builder, "builder");
super();
builder.invoke(this);
this.result = new JsonObject();
}
Therefore, the solution is to move the declaration and initialisation of result earlier than the initialiser block.
class JsonBuilder(builder: JsonBuilder.() -> Unit) {
val result = JsonObject()
init {
builder()
}
// ...
}
And the result is now...
{"name":"value","int":1,"obj":{},"true":true}
EDIT: You'll also want to allow chaining with your DSL, and fix a bug you currently have.
operator fun String.invoke(builder: JsonBuilder.() -> Unit) {
val obj = JsonBuilder(builder).result
result.add(this, obj)
}
Which produces the correct result of
{"name":"value","obj":{"int":1},"true":true}