What does "with" mean in Kotlin? - kotlin

I've read the docs on it 3 times and I still have no idea what it does. Can someone ELI5 (Explain Like I'm Five) it please? Here's how I'm using it:
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
val UserModel = UserModel()
val app = Javalin.create().port(7000).start()
with (app) {
get("/users") {
context -> context.json(UserModel)
}
}
}

with is used to access an object's members and methods without having to refer to the object once per access. It is (mostly) for abbreviating your code. It is frequently used when constructing an object:
// Verbose way, 204 characters:
var thing = Thingummy()
thing.component1 = something()
thing.component2 = somethingElse()
thing.component3 = constantValue
thing.component4 = foo()
thing.component5 = bar()
parent.children.add(thing)
thing.refcount = 1
// Terse way, 182 characters:
var thing = Thingummy()
with(thing) {
component1 = something()
component2 = somethingElse()
component3 = constantValue
component4 = foo()
component5 = bar()
parent.children.add(this)
refcount = 1
}

The documentation says:
inline fun <T, R> with(receiver: T, block: T.() -> R): R (source)
Calls the specified function block with the given receiver as its receiver and returns its result.
The way I think of it is that it is calling a function (the block) where this in the scope of the block is the receiver.
Whatever the block returns is the return type.
Essentially calling a method where you provide the implicit this and can return any result from it.
Here is an example to demonstrate:
val rec = "hello"
val returnedValue: Int = with(rec) {
println("$this is ${length}")
lastIndexOf("l")
}
The rec in this case is the receiver of the function call - the this in the scope of the block. The $length and lastIndexOf are both called on the receiver.
The return value can be seen to be an Int because that is the last method call in the body - that is the generic type parameter R of the signature.

The definition of with:
inline fun <T, R> with(receiver: T, block: T.() -> R): R (source)
Actually it's implementation is straight forward: The block is executed on receiver, which works for any type:
receiver.block() //that's the body of `with`
The great thing to mention here, is the parameter type T.() -> R:
It's called function literal with receiver. It's actually a lambda that can access the receiver's members without any additional qualifiers.
In your example the context of with receiver app is accessed in that way.
Besides stdlib functions like with or apply, this functionality is what makes Kotlin great for writing Domain Specific Languages as it allows the creation of scopes within which you have access on certain functionalities.

val citizen2 = Citizen("Tom", 24, "Washington")
val age = with(citizen2) {
println("$name - $age $residence ")
age = this.age + age
residence = "Florida"
age+10 // returns 58
}
println("${citizen2.name} - ${citizen2.age} - $age - ${citizen2.residence} ")
data class Citizen(var name: String, var age: Int, var residence: String)
Output:
Tom - 24 Washington
Tom - 48 - 58 - Florida
Note that :
We can access age property of citizen(receiver object) with this.age or age
last line(age+10 in this example) in the lambda of with() returns.

With is used to apply several operations to an object or access object's methods e.g. in this example we are accessing String's capitalize() extension method
data class Person(val name:String)
fun main(){
val person = Person("john doe")
with(person) {
println(name.capitalize()) // output John Doe
}
}
Under the hood with is a higher-order function. Here we are saying with the Person name call capitalize ( ). We don’t actually need ‘this’ because it is implicit and can be removed

Related

Understanding a lambda construct that contains dot followed by brackets

This is the function declaration for rememberCoilPainter:
#Composable
fun rememberCoilPainter(
request: Any?,
imageLoader: ImageLoader = CoilPainterDefaults.defaultImageLoader(),
shouldRefetchOnSizeChange: ShouldRefetchOnSizeChange = ShouldRefetchOnSizeChange { _, _ -> false },
requestBuilder: (ImageRequest.Builder.(size: IntSize) -> ImageRequest.Builder)? = null,
fadeIn: Boolean = false,
fadeInDurationMs: Int = LoadPainterDefaults.FadeInTransitionDuration,
#DrawableRes previewPlaceholder: Int = 0,
): LoadPainter<Any> {
}
The line of code I am having difficulty understanding is:
requestBuilder: (ImageRequest.Builder.(size: IntSize) -> ImageRequest.Builder)? = null
A dot appears after Builder followed by (size: IntSize)
This is the first time I've seen this construct in Kotlin and am not sure how to interpret it. This is a lambda. Normally the dot after an object refers to a sub component of a class or a package. But the ( ) after the dot isn't clear.
How do I implement the requestBuilder parameter?
This is a function with receiver type as described here: https://kotlinlang.org/docs/lambdas.html#function-types
Function types can optionally have an additional receiver type, which is specified before a dot in the notation: the type A.(B) -> C represents functions that can be called on a receiver object of A with a parameter of B and return a value of C. Function literals with receiver are often used along with these types.
It could be tricky to understand at first, but this is like you are providing a function/lambda that is a method of ImageRequest.Builder. Or in other words: your lambda receives one additional parameter of type ImageRequest.Builder and it is available in the lambda as this.
You can provide requestBuilder as any other lambda, but note that inside it you will have access to properties and methods of ImageRequest.Builder object that was provided to you.
What you are looking at is a "function literal with receiver". Speaking generically, a type A.(B) -> C represents a function that can be called on a receiver object of A with a parameter of B and return a value of C. Or in your example:
requestBuilder: (ImageRequest.Builder.(size: IntSize) -> ImageRequest.Builder)?
We have a function requestBuilder which can be called on a ImageRequest.Builder with a parameter size: IntSize and returns another ImageRequest.Builder.
Calling this function is just like calling any other function with a lambda as a parameter. The difference: You have access to ImageRequest.Builder as this inside your lambda block.
Hope the following example helps understand lambdas with receiver type:
data class Person(val name: String)
fun getPrefixSafely(
prefixLength: Int,
person: Person?,
getPrefix: Person.(Int) -> String): String
{
if (person?.name?.length ?: 0 < prefixLength) return ""
return person?.getPrefix(prefixLength).orEmpty()
}
// Here is how getPrefixSafely can be called
getPrefixSafely(
prefixLength = 2,
person = Person("name"),
getPrefix = { x -> this.name.take(x) }
)
How do I implement the requestBuilder parameter?
Hope this part of the code snippet answers the above:
getPrefix = { x -> this.name.take(x) }
PS: These lambdas with receiver types are similar to extension functions IMO.

Kotlin: maxBy{} with optimum-value

Let's say I have the following code in Kotlin:
val min = listOf("hello", "", "teeeeeest").minBy { it.length }
What I understand from the implementation of minBy is that it tracks minValue in a variable and iterates through the whole collection and updates it once it finds an even smaller element.
In the case of Strings though, we know that no element can have a value smaller than 0, therefore the empty String "" is optimal and the iteration can be stopped.
Is there a way I can tell minBy (or maxBy) the optimal value so it can stop once that is reached? If not, how can I implement this most easily?
There's no function in the stdlib that can do this, but you can implement it as an extension function yourself.
By using the non-local return feature of inline lambda functions in Kotlin, you can implement it like this:
fun <T, E : Comparable<E>> Iterable<T>.minBy(theoreticalMinimum: E, keySelector: (T) -> E): T? =
minBy {
val key = keySelector(it)
if (key <= theoreticalMinimum) return it // Non-local return.
else key
}
Now you can use it like this, and it will never visit "teeeeeest":
val min = listOf("hello", "", "teeeeeest").minBy(theoreticalMinimum = 0) { it.length }

Understanding the need for Kotlin let

I'm trying to understand why let is needed. In the example below I have a class Test with a function giveMeFive:
public class Test() {
fun giveMeFive(): Int {
return 5
}
}
Given the following code:
var test: Test? = Test()
var x: Int? = test?.giveMeFive()
test = null
x = test?.giveMeFive()
x = test?.let {it.giveMeFive()}
x gets set to 5, then after test is set to null, calling either of the following statements return null for x. Given that calling a method on a null reference skips the call and sets x to null, why would I ever need to use let? Are some cases where just ?. won't work and let is required?
Further, if the function being called doesn't return anything, then ?. will skip the call and I don't need ?.let there either.
let()
fun <T, R> T.let(f: (T) -> R): R = f(this)
let() is a scoping function: use it whenever you want to define a variable for a specific scope of your code but not beyond. It’s extremely useful to keep your code nicely self-contained so that you don’t have variables “leaking out”: being accessible past the point where they should be.
DbConnection.getConnection().let { connection ->
}
// connection is no longer visible here
let() can also be used as an alternative to testing against null:
val map : Map<String, Config> = ...
val config = map[key]
// config is a "Config?"
config?.let {
// This whole block will not be executed if "config" is null.
// Additionally, "it" has now been cast to a "Config" (no
question mark)
}
You need to use let if you want to chain function calls that aren't defined on the type you are chaining from.
Let's say the definition of your function was this instead:
// Not defined inside the Test class
fun giveMeFive(t: Test) {
return 5
}
Now, if you have a nullable Test and want to call this function in a chain, you have to use let:
val x = test?.let { giveMeFive(it) }
The .let{} extension function in Kotlin:
Takes the object reference as the parameter on which .let{} is called.
Returns value of any non-primitive data-type which has been returned from with let{} function. By default, it returns undefined value of kotlin.Any class.
Declaration in package kotlin:
public inline fun <T, R> T.let(block: (T) -> R): R {
return block(this)
}
Simple practical demonstration to see how .let{} extension function works in Kotlin.
Sample Code 1:-
val builder = StringBuilder("Hello ")
println("Print 0: $builder")
val returnVal = builder.let { arg ->
arg.append("World")
println("Print 1: $arg")
"Done" // Returnning some string
}
println("Print 2: $builder")
println("Print 3: $returnVal")
Sample Code 1 Output:-
Print 0: Hello
Print 1: Hello World
Print 2: Hello World
Print 3: Done
In Sample Code 1:
We created the final object of type StringBuilder with initialization value "Hello ".
In builder.let{}, the builder object reference will be passed to arg.
Here, the output Print 2: Hello World and Print 3: Hello World means that the builder and arg, both are pointing to the same StringBuilder object-reference. That's why they both print the same String value.
In the last line of .let{} function block, we are returning "Done" String value which will be assigned to returnVal.
*Hence, we get Print 3: Done output from returnVal.
Sample Code 2:-
val builder = StringBuilder("Hello ")
println("Print 0: $builder")
val returnVal = builder.let { arg ->
arg.append("World")
println("Print 1: $arg")
arg.length
}
println("Print 2: $builder")
println("Print 3: $returnVal") // Now return val is int = length of string.
Sample Code 2 Output:-
Print 0: Hello
Print 1: Hello World
Print 2: Hello World
Print 3: 11
In Sample Code 2:
What's difference:
In the last line of .let{} function block, we are returning the Int value equals to the length of StringBuilder object arg whose value at this line of code is "Hello World". So length = 11 of type Int will be assigned to returnVal.
*Hence, we get Print 3: 11 as output from returnVal.
Also try these:-
.run() {}
.apply() {}
with(obj) {}
.also() {}
Happy Coding...
fun <T, R> T.let(f: (T) -> R): R = f(this)
.let block does not equal to in multiThreading
val x? = null
if(x == null) {
}
and
x?.let{
}
.let block is thread-safe

Override getValue and setValue to capselate a Pair

Let's say I have following class:
class Person() {
var age: Pair<String, Int> = Pair("person_age", 23)
// override getValue and setValue here
}
Now I want to capsulate the actual Pair and only want the user to read/write the second value of the pair. Is it possible to override the getValue and setValue methods so I can do something like this:
val p = Person()
p.age = 25
if(p.age <= 30)
Of course I can write own getter and setter methods for each property but one nice thing about Kotlin is that you have to write such less boilerplate code which will get lost then.
The following should probably already suffice:
class Person() {
var age : Int = 23 // public by default
private /* or internal */ fun toAgePair() = "person_age" to age // narrow visibility
}
So all your code accesses the age as you have shown:
val p = Person()
p.age = 25
if (p.age <= 30) ...
But if you require your Pair you just do the following instead:
p.toAgePair() // or skip that method and use: '"person_age" to p.age' instead
Alternatives to access the Pair content are: Pair.first, Pair.second or destructured, e.g.:
val myPair = Pair("person_age", 23)
// myPair.second = 25 // setting will not work however
myPair.let { (name, age) -> /* do something with it */ }
Or alternatively:
val p = Person()
val (name, age) = p.toAgePair()
// age = 25 // setting will not work however (and it wouldn't set the actual value inside the Pair if it would contain vars)
if (age < 30) // accessing is OK
However then you get access to both values which you probably didn't want in the first place, if I understood you correctly.
You could overcome the setting part using your own data class with a var but then again, you do not really gain something from it.
I wouldn't recommend you to use Pair at all. Maybe you could modify it (inherit from it, use extension functions) to suit your needs, but why try to change something as simple as Pair?. It is much easier and in this case also cleaner to just create your own class which suits your needs:
data class MyPair<out A, B>(
val first: A,
var second: B
)
val pair = MyPair("age", 1)
pair.second = 2
pair.first = 1 // error
This class has all important features which Pair has: generic types for first and second, and you can use destructuring declarations.
Now I want to capselate the actual Pair and only want the user to read/write the second value of the pair.
Assuming this means you want the first value to be final, but not the second one, there are some options.
If you only want one of the values to be writeable and readable, don't use a pair. It's not designed to be used like that. All the items of a Pair are vals.
If you want a Pair either way, can do this:
class Person(var age: Int = 23){
val pair: Pair<String, Int>
get() = Pair("person_age", age)
//Alternatively, if you don't want to use a property:
//fun getPair() = "person_age" to age
}
What this does is creating a final pair where the first value can't be modified, but the second can.
So now:
fun example(){
val person = Person()
person.age = 25;//Fine: Age is an int, and a var
//person.pair = Pair("something", 45)//fails: "Val cannot be reassigned
val pair = person.pair // Allowed. Accessing the pair still works
assert(pair.second == person.age) // This is true
}
However, if you're fine with a non-Pair solution, this works too:
data class Person (var age: Int, val string: String = "person_age")
fun example(){
val person = Person(23)
val (name, string) = person// Allowed! Just like with Pairs
person.age = 25; // Also allowed
//person.string = "something"//Not allowed
}
The n-touple unpacking is supported for data classes. If you don't have a data class, you need to declare an operator fun for each component you want to unpack. Example:
class Person (val string: String = "person_age", var age: Int){
operator fun component1() = string
operator fun component2() = age
}
But tbh, it sounds like the data class solution is the one you're looking for. It would lock the String to what it's initialized with, and because of the default value and its position, you can initialize it with a single positioned argument*
You could also use generics if you want to use the same class for multiple types.
* Assumes the code is in Kotlin. Positioned and default arguments don't work from Java code.
Here's how to overwrite a getter method in Kotlin
class Person {
var age: Int = 0
get() = if (field < 0) 0 else field
}
The attribute is accessed directly
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
val p = Person()
p.age = -28
println(p.age) //0
}

Function definition: fun vs val

I'm curious about what is the suggested way to define member functions in Kotlin. Consider these two member functions:
class A {
fun f(x: Int) = 42
val g = fun(x: Int) = 42
}
These appear to accomplish the same thing, but I found subtle differences.
The val based definition, for instance, seems to be more flexible in some scenarios. That is, I could not work out a straight forward way to compose f with other functions, but I could with g. To toy around with these definitions, I used the funKTionale library. I found that this does not compile:
val z = g andThen A::f // f is a member function
But if f were defined as a val pointing to the same function, it would compile just fine. To figure out what was going on I asked IntelliJ to explicitly define the type of ::f and g for me, and it gives me this:
val fref: KFunction1<Int, Int> = ::f
val gref: (Int) -> Int = g
So one is of type KFunction1<Int, Int>, the other is of type (Int) -> Int. It's easy to see that both represent functions of type Int -> Int.
What is the difference between these two types, and in which cases does it matter? I noticed that for top-level functions, I can compose them fine using either definition, but in order to make the aforementioned composition compile, I had to write it like so:
val z = g andThen A::f.partially1(this)
i.e. I had to partially apply it to this first.
Since I don't have to go through this hassle when using vals for functions, is there a reason why I should ever define non-Unit member functions using fun? Is there a difference in performance or semantics that I am missing?
Kotlin is all about Java interoperability and defining a function as a val will produce a completely different result in terms of the interoperability. The following Kotlin class:
class A {
fun f(x: Int) = 42
val g = fun(x: Int) = 42
}
is effectively equivalent to:
public class A {
private final Function1<Integer, Integer> gref = new Function1<Integer, Integer>() {
#Override
public Integer invoke(final Integer integer) {
return 42;
}
};
public int f(final int value) {
return 42;
}
public Function1<Integer, Integer> getG() {
return gref;
}
}
As you can see, the main differences are:
fun f is just a usual method, while val g in fact is a higher-order function that returns another function
val g involves creation of a new class which isn't good if you are targeting Android
val g requires unnecessary boxing and unboxing
val g cannot be easily invoked from java: A().g(42) in Kotlin vs new A().getG().invoke(42) in Java
UPDATE:
Regarding the A::f syntax. The compiler will generate an extra Function2<A, Integer, Integer> class for every A::f occurrence, so the following code results in two extra classes with 7 methods each:
val first = A::f
val second = A::f
Kotlin compiler isn't smart enough at the moment to optimize such kind of things. You can vote for the issue here https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-9831. In case you are interested, here is how each class looks in the bytecode: https://gist.github.com/nsk-mironov/fc13f2075bfa05d8a3c3
Here's some code showing how f and g are different when it comes to usage:
fun main(args: Array<String>) {
val a = A()
exe(a.g) // OK
//exe(a.f) // does not compile
exe { a.f(it) } // OK
}
fun exe(p: (Int) -> Int) {
println(p(0))
}
Where f and g are:
fun f(x: Int) = 42
val g = fun(x: Int) = 42
You can see that g is an object that can be used like a lambda, but f cannot. To use f similarly, you have to wrap it in a lambda.