-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
Add method distinct to TraverseFilter
#3603
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
djspiewak
merged 1 commit into
typelevel:master
from
takayahilton:add-distinct-traversefilter
Sep 13, 2020
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ | ||
| package cats.tests | ||
|
|
||
| import cats.data.Chain | ||
| import cats.instances.all._ | ||
| import cats.laws.discipline.arbitrary.catsLawsArbitraryForChain | ||
| import cats.syntax.eq._ | ||
| import cats.syntax.foldable._ | ||
| import cats.syntax.traverseFilter._ | ||
| import cats.{Traverse, TraverseFilter} | ||
| import org.scalacheck.Arbitrary | ||
| import org.scalacheck.Prop.forAll | ||
|
|
||
| import scala.collection.immutable.Queue | ||
|
|
||
| abstract class TraverseFilterSuite[F[_]: TraverseFilter](name: String)(implicit | ||
| ArbFInt: Arbitrary[F[Int]], | ||
| ArbFString: Arbitrary[F[String]] | ||
| ) extends CatsSuite { | ||
|
|
||
| implicit def T: Traverse[F] = implicitly[TraverseFilter[F]].traverse | ||
|
|
||
| test(s"TraverseFilter[$name].ordDistinct") { | ||
| forAll { (fa: F[Int]) => | ||
| fa.ordDistinct.toList === fa.toList.distinct | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| test(s"TraverseFilter[$name].hashDistinct") { | ||
| forAll { (fa: F[String]) => | ||
| fa.hashDistinct.toList === fa.toList.distinct | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| class TraverseFilterListSuite extends TraverseFilterSuite[List]("list") | ||
|
|
||
| class TraverseFilterVectorSuite extends TraverseFilterSuite[Vector]("vector") | ||
|
|
||
| class TraverseFilterChainSuite extends TraverseFilterSuite[Chain]("chain") | ||
|
|
||
| class TraverseFilterQueueSuite extends TraverseFilterSuite[Queue]("queue") | ||
|
|
||
| class TraverseFilterStreamSuite extends TraverseFilterSuite[Stream]("stream") |
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@takayahilton unfortunately it is not going to work the way it is supposed to.
The passed
Hashtypeclass is not used here sinceHashSetfrom Scala library relies on the Java'shashCodeinstead.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(linking to discussions in #4147 and #4185 just for reference)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@satorg note that the law I mentioned in #4147 (comment) effectively makes it okay, I think. At least at the time the PR was merged.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I see... Although I'm not getting it – if it is strictly required by the law for
Hashto produce the same value as the universal hash does, then why wouldHashbe useful for at all?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're right, it doesn't really make sense 😕 see discussion on the topic in #4118 (comment).
The problem is, it's difficult to fix this backwards-compatibly. Because there may be code (such as this PR) that relies on this "law" ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we should fix this. This "law" precludes many
Hashimplementations on opaque types.