Image

Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!

Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.

Do Scala's match types implement full dependent types?

+2
−0

Do Scala's match types support full spectrum dependent types, and if not, what capabilities do they lack?

History

0 comment threads

1 answer

+2
−0

Dependent types are types that depend on values. Scala's match types enable expressing types that depend on types. Scala's other type system features include path-dependent types, which allow types to depend on paths that represent values, but outside of literals and singletons, there is no way to express values themselves in the type system. So no, these are not full dependent types.

As an example of what isn't possible:

type MyTuple[n, A] = n match
  case 0 => Unit
  case 1 => A
  case 2 => (A, A)

def myfn(n: Int): MyTuple[n, String] = n match
  case 0 => ()
  case 1 => ""
  case 2 => ("", "")

Changing MyTuple[n, String] to MyTuple[n.type, String] doesn't help. n.type is a path-dependent type, so the type system knows that all occurrences of n.type are the same, but it doesn't know the run-time value of n and so can't reduce MyTuple enough to check the three cases.

History

1 comment thread

Confused by term-like type literals (7 comments)

Sign up to answer this question »