It seems I'm unable to use a method reference of an object in Kotlin. This feature exists in Java.
For example in Java if I was looping through a string to append each character to a writer:
string.forEach(writer::append);
But in Kotlin using the same syntax does not work because:
For now, Kotlin only supports references to top-level and local functions and members of classes, not individual instances. See the docs here.
So, you can say Writer::append and get a function Writer.(Char) -> Writer, but taking a writer instance and saying writer::append to get a function (Char) -> Writer is not supported at the moment.
Starting from Kotlin 1.1 writer::append is a perfectly valid bound callable reference.
However, you still cannot write string.forEach(writer::append) because Writer#append method returns a Writer instance and forEach expects a function that returns Unit.
I am using Kotlin 1.3 and while referencing a Java method I got a very similar error. As mentioned in this comment, making a lambda and passing it to the forEach method is a good option.
key.forEach { writter.append(it) }
Being it the implicit name of a single parameter.
Related
I am reading Kotlin in Action 2nd edition.
Chapter 3 says:
If the class has a member function with the same signature as an extension function, the member function always takes precedence
At the same the book demonstrates the CharSequence.split Kotlin's stdlib extension function (which API is less confusing than an API of Java's String#split).
The thing I do not understand is how this split extension functions takes precedence on the following call:
"12.345-6.A".split(".") // <-- Kotlin's extension function gets invoked here even though there is a member function on String class in Java with matching signature
The book also leaves the following comment on this case:
Kotlin hides the confusing method and provides as replacements several overloaded extensions named split that have different arguments
How does Kotlin hide a member function? Can I also shadow some member function which I do not like with my custom extension function? Or it is a trick which is only available to Kotlin language developers?
Actually Kotlin has a separate implementation of CharSequence and String.
These kotlin String/Charsequence does not have its split function. Kotlin team has made all those string implementation functions separately with help of extension functions.Your string will be referring to kotlin String instead of Java String.
If you need to create java String, you need to refer String with package like below.
var str : java.lang.String = java.lang.String("a b c")
str.split("")
Here it will always call Java split function.
Even if you create split function for java.lang.String , it will call only member function as you have read.
member function always takes precedence
I don't or can't modify the Java source code. The goal to configure just the Kotlin compiler to know what is nullable and what isn't.
You can specify the type manually if you know something will never be null. For example, if you have the following Java code:
public static Foo test() {
return null;
}
and you call it in Kotlin like this:
val result = Foo.test()
then result will have a type of Foo! by default – which means it can be either Foo or Foo?.. the compiler doesn't have enough information to determine that.
However, you can force the type manually:
val result: Foo = Foo.test()
// use "result" as a non-nullable type
Of course, if at runtime that is not true, you'll get a NullPointerException.
For reference, please check the documentation.
I don't know of a way to configure the compiler for this, but IntelliJ IDEA has a feature that allows you to add annotations to code via an XML file called external annotations.
You can add the Jetbrains #Nullable and #NotNull annotations to library code, but when I've tried it, it only results in compiler warnings rather than errors when you use incorrect nullability in your code. These same annotations generate compiler errors when used directly in the source code. I don't know why there is a difference in behavior.
You can use extension functions for this. If you have a method String foo() in the class Test, you can define the extension function
fun Test.safeFoo(): String = this.foo()!!
The advantage is that the code is pretty obious.
The disadvantage of this approach is that you need to write a lot of boiler plate code. You also have to define the extension function in a place where all your modules or projects can see it. Also, writing that much code just to avoid !! feels like overkill.
It should also be possible to write a Kotlin compiler extension which generates them for you but the extension would need to know which methods never return null.
Example:
data class T(val flag: Boolean) {
constructor(n: Int) : this(run {
// Some computation here...
<Boolean result>
})
}
In this example, the custom constructor needs to run some computation in order to determine which value to pass to the primary constructor, but the compiler does not accept the run, citing Cannot access 'run' before superclass constructor has been called, which, if I understand correctly, means instead of interpreting it as the non-extension run (the variant with no object reference in https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/scope-functions.html#function-selection), it construes it as a call to this.run (the variant with an object reference in the above table) - which is invalid as the object has not completely instantiated yet.
What can I do in order to let the compiler know I mean the run function which is not an extension method and doesn't take a scope?
Clarification: I am interested in an answer to the question as asked, not in a workaround.
I can think of several workarounds - ways to rewrite this code in a way that works as intended without calling run: extracting the code to a function; rewriting it as a (possibly highly nested) let expression; removing the run and invoking the lambda (with () after it) instead (funnily enough, IntelliJ IDEA tags that as Redundant lambda creation and suggests to Inline the body, which reinstates the non-compiling run). But the question is not how to rewrite this without using run - it's how to make run work in this context.
A good answer should do one of the following things:
Explain how to instruct the compiler to call a function rather than an extension method when a name is overloaded, in general; or
Explain how to do that specifically for run; or
Explain that (and ideally also why) it is not possible to do (ideally with supporting references); or
Explain what I got wrong, in case I got something wrong and the whole question is irrelevant (e.g. if my analysis is incorrect, and the problem is something other than the compiler construing the call to run as this.run).
If someone has a neat workaround not mentioned above they're welcome to post it in a comment - not as an answer.
In case it matters: I'm using multi-platform Kotlin 1.4.20.
Kotlin favors the receiver overload if it is in scope. The solution is to use the fully qualified name of the non-receiver function:
kotlin.run { //...
The specification is explained here.
Another option when the overloads are not in the same package is to use import renaming, but that won't work in this case since both run functions are in the same package.
I was following this link https://kotlin.link/articles/DSL-builder-in-Kotlin.html to understand the builder implementation in Kotlin. I didn't understand the methods inside Builder class. Method name() receives Extension Function as an argument which receives nothing and returns String. And the caller calls name { "ABC" }. If the caller is passing String to name method, how does it translate to an Extension method which returns String ?
I tried following Kotlin documentation for Function literals with receivers but all had samples which returns Unit or refers to DSL Builders. Tried googling it as well to understand but no luck in grasping the concept.
The call to name { "ABC" } is a combination of two Kotlin conventions.
There is a convention that if the last parameter to a function is a function you can omit the parenthesis. Also since there are no parameters to the lambda, "ABC" is what is returned by it.
So the caller is actually passing a lambda in the form name ({() -> "ABC"}), rather than a String.
Looking at the example in the link, it doesn't look like the receiver is necessary for name(), which is why it could be misleading.
Can I have serializable lambda in Kotlin? I am trying to use Jinq library from Kotlin, but it requires serializable lambdas. Is there any syntax that makes it possible?
Update:
My code:
var temp=anyDao.streamAll(Task::class.java)
.where<Exception,Task> { t->t.taskStatus== TaskStatus.accepted }
.collect(Collectors.toList<Task>());
I am getting this error:
Caused by: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException:
Could not extract code from lambda.
This error sometimes occurs because your lambda references objects that aren't Serializable.
All objects referenced in lambda are serializable (code results in no errors in java).
Update 2
After debugging it seems that kotlin lambda isn't translated into java.lang.invoke.SerializedLambda which is required by Jinq to get information from. So the problem is how to convert it to SerializedLambda.
I'm the maker of Jinq. I haven't had the time to look at Kotlin-support, but based on your description, I'm assuming that Kotlin compiles its lambdas into actual classes or something else. As such, Jinq would probably need some special code for cracking open Kotlin lambdas, and it may also need special code for handling any unusual Kotlin-isms in the generated code. Jinq should be capable of handling it because it was previously retrofitted to handle Scala lambdas.
If you file an issue in the Jinq github about it, along with a small Kotlin example (in both source and .class file form), then I can take a quick peek at what might be involved. If it's small, I can make those changes. Unfortunately, if it looks like a lot of work, I don't think I can really justify putting a lot of resources into adding Kotlin support to Jinq.
I have no experience on Jinq, but according to the implementation in GitHub and my experience of using Java Library in Kotlin.
ref: https://github.com/my2iu/Jinq/blob/master/api/src/org/jinq/orm/stream/JinqStream.java
You can always fall back to use the native Java Interface in Kotlin.
var temp = anyDao.streamAll(Task::class.java)
.where( JinqStream.Where<Task,Exception> { t -> t.taskStatus == TaskStatus.accepted } )
.collect(Collectors.toList<Task>());
// Alternatively, You you can import the interface first
import org.jinq.orm.stream.JinqStream.*
...
// then you can use Where instead of JinqStream.Where
var temp = anyDao.streamAll(Task::class.java)
.where(Where<Task,Exception> { t -> t.taskStatus == TaskStatus.accepted } )
.collect(Collectors.toList<Task>());
Or make a custom extension to wrap the implementation
fun JinqStream<T>.where(f: (T) -> Boolean): JinqStream<T> {
return this.where(JinqStream.Where<T,Exception> { f(it) })
}
Disclaimer: The above codes have not been tested.