我正在试图弄清楚如何在curried函数上进行抽象。 我可以通过以下方式抽象出未经验证的函数:
def liftAU[F, P <: Product, L <: HList, R, A[_]](f: F)
(implicit
fp: FnToProduct.Aux[F, L => R],
gen: Generic.Aux[P, L],
ap: Applicative[A]
): A[P] => A[R] = p => p.map(gen.to).map(f.toProduct)
这将采用类似(Int,Int)=&gt;的函数。 Int并将其转换为类似Option [(Int,Int)] =&gt;的内容。选项[INT]。它适用于任何功能。
我想创建一个curried版本,它将采用类似Int =&gt;的函数。 Int =&gt; Int并将其转换为Option [Int] =&gt;选项[Int] =&gt;选项[INT]。
它也应该适用于任何咖喱功能。
由于FnToProduct仅适用于第一个参数列表,因此在这里没有用,我也尝试在类型级别编写一些递归定义,但是我在定义类型时遇到了问题。
不确定它是否可行,但很想知道其他人是否尝试过这样的事情。
答案 0 :(得分:3)
Int => Int => Int => Int
这样的函数,而且我觉得使用Poly
值非常烦人,所以我没有调试上一个答案,而只是自己编写。
你可以使用100%无Shapeless类型来实际编写这个操作:
import cats.Applicative
trait LiftCurried[F[_], I, O] {
type Out
def apply(f: F[I => O]): F[I] => Out
}
object LiftCurried extends LowPriorityLiftCurried {
implicit def liftCurried1[F[_]: Applicative, I, I2, O2](implicit
lc: LiftCurried[F, I2, O2]
): Aux[F, I, I2 => O2, F[I2] => lc.Out] = new LiftCurried[F, I, I2 => O2] {
type Out = F[I2] => lc.Out
def apply(f: F[I => I2 => O2]): F[I] => F[I2] => lc.Out =
(Applicative[F].ap(f) _).andThen(lc(_))
}
}
trait LowPriorityLiftCurried {
type Aux[F[_], I, O, Out0] = LiftCurried[F, I, O] { type Out = Out0 }
implicit def liftCurried0[F[_]: Applicative, I, O]: Aux[F, I, O, F[O]] =
new LiftCurried[F, I, O] {
type Out = F[O]
def apply(f: F[I => O]): F[I] => F[O] = Applicative[F].ap(f) _
}
}
它可能会使它更清洁,但我发现它是合理的可读性。
你可能希望得到像这样具体的东西:
def liftCurriedIntoOption[I, O](f: I => O)(implicit
lc: LiftCurried[Option, I, O]
): Option[I] => lc.Out = lc(Some(f))
然后我们可以证明它适用于这样的一些函数:
val f: Int => Int => Int = x => y => x + y
val g: Int => Int => Int => Int = x => y => z => x + y * z
val h: Int => Int => Int => String => String = x => y => z => _ * (x + y * z)
然后:
scala> import cats.instances.option._
import cats.instances.option._
scala> val ff = liftCurriedIntoOption(f)
ff: Option[Int] => (Option[Int] => Option[Int]) = scala.Function1$$Lambda$1744/350671260@73d06630
scala> val gg = liftCurriedIntoOption(g)
gg: Option[Int] => (Option[Int] => (Option[Int] => Option[Int])) = scala.Function1$$Lambda$1744/350671260@2bb9b82c
scala> val hh = liftCurriedIntoOption(h)
hh: Option[Int] => (Option[Int] => (Option[Int] => (Option[String] => Option[String]))) = scala.Function1$$Lambda$1744/350671260@45eec9c6
我们还可以多次应用它只是为了它的地狱:
scala> val hhhh = liftCurriedIntoOption(liftCurriedIntoOption(hh))
hhh: Option[Option[Option[Int]]] => (Option[Option[Option[Int]]] => (Option[Option[Option[Int]]] => (Option[Option[Option[String]]] => Option[Option[Option[String]]]))) = scala.Function1$$Lambda$1744/350671260@592593bd
所以类型看起来没问题,而且价值......
scala> ff(Some(1))(Some(2))
res0: Option[Int] = Some(3)
scala> ff(Some(1))(None)
res1: Option[Int] = None
scala> hh(Some(1))(None)(None)(None)
res2: Option[String] = None
scala> hh(Some(1))(Some(2))(Some(3))(Some("a"))
res3: Option[String] = Some(aaaaaaa)
......我认为这是你的目标。
答案 1 :(得分:1)
您可以定义递归Poly
object constNone extends Poly1 {
implicit def zeroCase[In]: Case.Aux[In, Option[Int]] = at(_ => None)
implicit def succCase[In, In1, Out](implicit
cse: Case.Aux[In, Out]): Case.Aux[In1, In => Out] = at(_ => cse(_))
}
object transform extends Poly1 {
implicit def zeroCase: Case.Aux[Int, Option[Int]] = at(Some(_))
implicit def succCase[In, Out](implicit
cse: Case.Aux[In, Out],
noneCase: constNone.Case.Aux[In, Out]
): Case.Aux[Int => In, Option[Int] => Out] =
at(f => {
case Some(n) => cse(f(n))
case None => noneCase(f(0))
})
}
(transform((x: Int) => (y: Int) => x + y) _)(Some(1))(Some(2)) //Some(3)
(transform((x: Int) => (y: Int) => x + y) _)(Some(1))(None) //None
(transform((x: Int) => (y: Int) => x + y) _)(None)(Some(2)) //None