Type Class Derivation
Type class derivation is a way to automatically generate given instances for type classes which satisfy some simple
conditions. A type class in this sense is any trait or class with a type parameter determining the type being operated
on. Common examples are Eq
, Ordering
, or Show
. For example, given the following Tree
algebraic data type
(ADT),
enum Tree[T] derives Eq, Ordering, Show {
case Branch[T](left: Tree[T], right: Tree[T])
case Leaf[T](elem: T)
}
The derives
clause generates the following given instances for the Eq
, Ordering
and Show
type classes in the
companion object of Tree
,
given [T: Eq] as Eq[Tree[T]] = Eq.derived
given [T: Ordering] as Ordering[Tree] = Ordering.derived
given [T: Show] as Show[Tree] = Show.derived
We say that Tree
is the deriving type and that the Eq
, Ordering
and Show
instances are derived instances.
Types supporting derives
clauses
All data types can have a derives
clause. This document focuses primarily on data types which also have a given instance
of the Mirror
type class available. Instances of the Mirror
type class are generated automatically by the compiler
for,
- enums and enum cases
- case classes and case objects
- sealed classes or traits that have only case classes and case objects as children
Mirror
type class instances provide information at the type level about the components and labelling of the type.
They also provide minimal term level infrastructure to allow higher level libraries to provide comprehensive
derivation support.
sealed trait Mirror {
/** the type being mirrored */
type MirroredType
/** the type of the elements of the mirrored type */
type MirroredElemTypes
/** The mirrored *-type */
type MirroredMonoType
/** The name of the type */
type MirroredLabel <: String
/** The names of the elements of the type */
type MirroredElemLabels <: Tuple
}
object Mirror {
/** The Mirror for a product type */
trait Product extends Mirror {
/** Create a new instance of type `T` with elements taken from product `p`. */
def fromProduct(p: scala.Product): MirroredMonoType
}
trait Sum extends Mirror { self =>
/** The ordinal number of the case class of `x`. For enums, `ordinal(x) == x.ordinal` */
def ordinal(x: MirroredMonoType): Int
}
}
Product types (i.e. case classes and objects, and enum cases) have mirrors which are subtypes of Mirror.Product
. Sum
types (i.e. sealed class or traits with product children, and enums) have mirrors which are subtypes of Mirror.Sum
.
For the Tree
ADT from above the following Mirror
instances will be automatically provided by the compiler,
// Mirror for Tree
Mirror.Sum {
type MirroredType = Tree
type MirroredElemTypes[T] = (Branch[T], Leaf[T])
type MirroredMonoType = Tree[_]
type MirroredLabels = "Tree"
type MirroredElemLabels = ("Branch", "Leaf")
def ordinal(x: MirroredMonoType): Int = x match {
case _: Branch[_] => 0
case _: Leaf[_] => 1
}
}
// Mirror for Branch
Mirror.Product {
type MirroredType = Branch
type MirroredElemTypes[T] = (Tree[T], Tree[T])
type MirroredMonoType = Branch[_]
type MirroredLabels = "Branch"
type MirroredElemLabels = ("left", "right")
def fromProduct(p: Product): MirroredMonoType =
new Branch(...)
}
// Mirror for Leaf
Mirror.Product {
type MirroredType = Leaf
type MirroredElemTypes[T] = Tuple1[T]
type MirroredMonoType = Leaf[_]
type MirroredLabels = "Leaf"
type MirroredElemLabels = Tuple1["elem"]
def fromProduct(p: Product): MirroredMonoType =
new Leaf(...)
}
Note the following properties of Mirror
types,
- Properties are encoded using types rather than terms. This means that they have no runtime footprint unless used and also that they are a compile time feature for use with Dotty's metaprogramming facilities.
- The kinds of
MirroredType
andMirroredElemTypes
match the kind of the data type the mirror is an instance for. This allowsMirrors
to support ADTs of all kinds. - There is no distinct representation type for sums or products (ie. there is no
HList
orCoproduct
type as in Scala 2 versions of shapeless). Instead the collection of child types of a data type is represented by an ordinary, possibly parameterized, tuple type. Dotty's metaprogramming facilities can be used to work with these tuple types as-is, and higher level libraries can be built on top of them. - For both product and sum types, the elements of
MirroredElemTypes
are arranged in definition order (i.e.Branch[T]
precedesLeaf[T]
inMirroredElemTypes
forTree
becauseBranch
is defined beforeLeaf
in the source file). This means thatMirror.Sum
differs in this respect from shapeless's generic representation for ADTs in Scala 2, where the constructors are ordered alphabetically by name. - The methods
ordinal
andfromProduct
are defined in terms ofMirroredMonoType
which is the type of kind-*
which is obtained fromMirroredType
by wildcarding its type parameters.
Type classes supporting automatic deriving
A trait or class can appear in a derives
clause if its companion object defines a method named derived
. The
signature and implementation of a derived
method for a type class TC[_]
are arbitrary but it is typically of the
following form,
def derived[T](using Mirror.Of[T]): TC[T] = ...
That is, the derived
method takes a context parameter of (some subtype of) type Mirror
which defines the shape of
the deriving type T
, and computes the type class implementation according to that shape. This is all that the
provider of an ADT with a derives
clause has to know about the derivation of a type class instance.
Note that derived
methods may have context Mirror
parameters indirectly (e.g. by having a context argument which in turn
has a context Mirror
parameter, or not at all (e.g. they might use some completely different user-provided mechanism, for
instance using Dotty macros or runtime reflection). We expect that (direct or indirect) Mirror
based implementations
will be the most common and that is what this document emphasises.
Type class authors will most likely use higher level derivation or generic programming libraries to implement
derived
methods. An example of how a derived
method might be implemented using only the low level facilities
described above and Dotty's general metaprogramming features is provided below. It is not anticipated that type class
authors would normally implement a derived
method in this way, however this walkthrough can be taken as a guide for
authors of the higher level derivation libraries that we expect typical type class authors will use (for a fully
worked out example of such a library, see shapeless 3).
How to write a type class derived
method using low level mechanisms
The low-level method we will use to implement a type class derived
method in this example exploits three new
type-level constructs in Dotty: inline methods, inline matches, and implicit searches via summonInline
or summonFrom
. Given this definition of the
Eq
type class,
trait Eq[T] {
def eqv(x: T, y: T): Boolean
}
we need to implement a method Eq.derived
on the companion object of Eq
that produces a given instance for Eq[T]
given
a Mirror[T]
. Here is a possible implementation,
inline given derived[T](using m: Mirror.Of[T]) as Eq[T] = {
val elemInstances = summonAll[m.MirroredElemTypes] // (1)
inline m match { // (2)
case s: Mirror.SumOf[T] => eqSum(s, elemInstances)
case p: Mirror.ProductOf[T] => eqProduct(p, elemInstances)
}
}
Note that derived
is defined as an inline
given. This means that the method will be expanded at
call sites (for instance the compiler generated instance definitions in the companion objects of ADTs which have a
derived Eq
clause), and also that it can be used recursively if necessary, to compute instances for children.
The body of this method (1) first materializes the Eq
instances for all the child types of type the instance is
being derived for. This is either all the branches of a sum type or all the fields of a product type. The
implementation of summonAll
is inline
and uses Dotty's summonInline
construct to collect the instances as a
List
,
inline def summonAll[T <: Tuple]: List[Eq[_]] = inline erasedValue[T] match {
case _: Unit => Nil
case _: (t *: ts) => summonInline[Eq[t]] :: summonAll[ts]
}
with the instances for children in hand the derived
method uses an inline match
to dispatch to methods which can
construct instances for either sums or products (2). Note that because derived
is inline
the match will be
resolved at compile-time and only the left-hand side of the matching case will be inlined into the generated code with
types refined as revealed by the match.
In the sum case, eqSum
, we use the runtime ordinal
values of the arguments to eqv
to first check if the two
values are of the same subtype of the ADT (3) and then, if they are, to further test for equality based on the Eq
instance for the appropriate ADT subtype using the auxiliary method check
(4).
def eqSum[T](s: Mirror.SumOf[T], elems: List[Eq[_]]): Eq[T] =
new Eq[T] {
def eqv(x: T, y: T): Boolean = {
val ordx = s.ordinal(x) // (3)
(s.ordinal(y) == ordx) && check(elems(ordx))(x, y) // (4)
}
}
In the product case, eqProduct
we test the runtime values of the arguments to eqv
for equality as products based
on the Eq
instances for the fields of the data type (5),
def eqProduct[T](p: Mirror.ProductOf[T], elems: List[Eq[_]]): Eq[T] =
new Eq[T] {
def eqv(x: T, y: T): Boolean =
iterator(x).zip(iterator(y)).zip(elems.iterator).forall { // (5)
case ((x, y), elem) => check(elem)(x, y)
}
}
Pulling this all together we have the following complete implementation,
import scala.deriving._
import scala.compiletime.{erasedValue, summonInline}
inline def summonAll[T <: Tuple]: List[Eq[_]] = inline erasedValue[T] match {
case _: Unit => Nil
case _: (t *: ts) => summonInline[Eq[t]] :: summonAll[ts]
}
trait Eq[T] {
def eqv(x: T, y: T): Boolean
}
object Eq {
given Eq[Int] as {
def eqv(x: Int, y: Int) = x == y
}
def check(elem: Eq[_])(x: Any, y: Any): Boolean =
elem.asInstanceOf[Eq[Any]].eqv(x, y)
def iterator[T](p: T) = p.asInstanceOf[Product].productIterator
def eqSum[T](s: Mirror.SumOf[T], elems: List[Eq[_]]): Eq[T] =
new Eq[T] {
def eqv(x: T, y: T): Boolean = {
val ordx = s.ordinal(x)
(s.ordinal(y) == ordx) && check(elems(ordx))(x, y)
}
}
def eqProduct[T](p: Mirror.ProductOf[T], elems: List[Eq[_]]): Eq[T] =
new Eq[T] {
def eqv(x: T, y: T): Boolean =
iterator(x).zip(iterator(y)).zip(elems.iterator).forall {
case ((x, y), elem) => check(elem)(x, y)
}
}
inline given derived[T](using m: Mirror.Of[T]) as Eq[T] = {
val elemInstances = summonAll[m.MirroredElemTypes]
inline m match {
case s: Mirror.SumOf[T] => eqSum(s, elemInstances)
case p: Mirror.ProductOf[T] => eqProduct(p, elemInstances)
}
}
}
we can test this relative to a simple ADT like so,
enum Opt[+T] derives Eq {
case Sm(t: T)
case Nn
}
object Test extends App {
import Opt._
val eqoi = summon[Eq[Opt[Int]]]
assert(eqoi.eqv(Sm(23), Sm(23)))
assert(!eqoi.eqv(Sm(23), Sm(13)))
assert(!eqoi.eqv(Sm(23), Nn))
}
In this case the code that is generated by the inline expansion for the derived Eq
instance for Opt
looks like the
following, after a little polishing,
given derived$Eq[T](using eqT: Eq[T]) as Eq[Opt[T]] =
eqSum(summon[Mirror[Opt[T]]],
List(
eqProduct(summon[Mirror[Sm[T]]], List(summon[Eq[T]]))
eqProduct(summon[Mirror[Nn.type]], Nil)
)
)
Alternative approaches can be taken to the way that derived
methods can be defined. For example, more aggressively
inlined variants using Dotty macros, whilst being more involved for type class authors to write than the example
above, can produce code for type classes like Eq
which eliminate all the abstraction artefacts (eg. the Lists
of
child instances in the above) and generate code which is indistinguishable from what a programmer might write by hand.
As a third example, using a higher level library such as shapeless the type class author could define an equivalent
derived
method as,
given eqSum[A](using inst: => K0.CoproductInstances[Eq, A]) as Eq[A] {
def eqv(x: A, y: A): Boolean = inst.fold2(x, y)(false)(
[t] => (eqt: Eq[t], t0: t, t1: t) => eqt.eqv(t0, t1)
)
}
given eqProduct[A](using inst: K0.ProductInstances[Eq, A]) as Eq[A] {
def eqv(x: A, y: A): Boolean = inst.foldLeft2(x, y)(true: Boolean)(
[t] => (acc: Boolean, eqt: Eq[t], t0: t, t1: t) => Complete(!eqt.eqv(t0, t1))(false)(true)
)
}
inline def derived[A](using gen: K0.Generic[A]) as Eq[A] = gen.derive(eqSum, eqProduct)
The framework described here enables all three of these approaches without mandating any of them.
For a brief discussion on how to use macros to write a type class derived
method please read more at How to write a type class derived
method using
macros.
Deriving instances elsewhere
Sometimes one would like to derive a type class instance for an ADT after the ADT is defined, without being able to
change the code of the ADT itself. To do this, simply define an instance using the derived
method of the type class
as right-hand side. E.g, to implement Ordering
for Option
define,
given [T: Ordering] as Ordering[Option[T]] = Ordering.derived
Assuming the Ordering.derived
method has a context parameter of type Mirror[T]
it will be satisfied by the
compiler generated Mirror
instance for Option
and the derivation of the instance will be expanded on the right
hand side of this definition in the same way as an instance defined in ADT companion objects.
Syntax
Template ::= InheritClauses [TemplateBody]
EnumDef ::= id ClassConstr InheritClauses EnumBody
InheritClauses ::= [‘extends’ ConstrApps] [‘derives’ QualId {‘,’ QualId}]
ConstrApps ::= ConstrApp {‘with’ ConstrApp}
| ConstrApp {‘,’ ConstrApp}
Discussion
This type class derivation framework is intentionally very small and low-level. There are essentially two pieces of
infrastructure in compiler-generated Mirror
instances,
- type members encoding properties of the mirrored types.
- a minimal value level mechanism for working generically with terms of the mirrored types.
The Mirror
infrastructure can be seen as an extension of the existing Product
infrastructure for case classes:
typically Mirror
types will be implemented by the ADTs companion object, hence the type members and the ordinal
or
fromProduct
methods will be members of that object. The primary motivation for this design decision, and the
decision to encode properties via types rather than terms was to keep the bytecode and runtime footprint of the
feature small enough to make it possible to provide Mirror
instances unconditionally.
Whilst Mirrors
encode properties precisely via type members, the value level ordinal
and fromProduct
are
somewhat weakly typed (because they are defined in terms of MirroredMonoType
) just like the members of Product
.
This means that code for generic type classes has to ensure that type exploration and value selection proceed in
lockstep and it has to assert this conformance in some places using casts. If generic type classes are correctly
written these casts will never fail.
As mentioned, however, the compiler-provided mechansim is intentionally very low level and it is anticipated that higher level type class derivation and generic programming libraries will build on this and Dotty's other metaprogramming facilities to hide these low-level details from type class authors and general users. Type class derivation in the style of both shapeless and Magnolia are possible (a prototype of shapeless 3, which combines aspects of both shapeless 2 and Magnolia has been developed alongside this language feature) as is a more aggressively inlined style, supported by Dotty's new quote/splice macro and inlining facilities.