In Scala, the interaction of overloading and implicit argument resolution seem to make it impossible to make the following code usable.
If I have these 2 constructors for MyClass: MyClass(int n1); MyClass(int n1, int n2); and an overloaded (non-member) operator+:
I would like to store some objects from different type hierarchy into List[Any] or similar container, but perform implicit conversions on th开发者_Python百科em later on to do something like type class
Consider the following code: object foo { trait开发者_如何转开发 Bar[Q[_]] implicit object OptionBar extends Bar[Option]
struct Base{ Base(Base &){}// suppress default constructor }; struct Derived : Base{ }; int main(){ Derived d;
I have this inheritance sealed abstract class MyValue case class MyString(s:String) extends MyValue case class MyBoolean(b:Boolean) extends MyValue
I\'ve written a custom trait which extends Iterator[A] and I\'d like to be able to use the methods 开发者_如何学JAVAI\'ve written on an Iterator[A] which is returned from another method.Is this possib
scala> class A(implicit a: Int); defined class A scala> class B()(implicit a: Int); defined class B
Often there\'s no need to pay any attention to implicit arguments in Scala, but sometimes it\'s very helpful to understand how the compiler is automatically providing them. Unfortunately, this underst
So I\'ve started looking at ruby, and a lot of things look nice but I\'m quite put off by implicit return statements. I understand making everything return self or nil by default but not the last valu
加载中,请稍侯......