https://kotlinlang.org logo
Join Slack
Powered by
I have a use case for inferring nested generic typ...
# language-proposals
i
I have a use case for inferring nested generic types in a function's definition. Consider the following code:
Copy code
interface Input<T>  { ... }
interface Output<T> { ... }
fun <In: Input<T>, T> registerForOutput(): Output<T> { ... }
Based on the type of 
In
, I want to be able to use 
registerForOutput
to create an 
Output
instance of the same generic type. In this situation, I refer to 
T
as the "nested generic type of `In`" in the context of 
registerForOutput
. To re-word the initial sentence: I want 
registerForOutput
to return an 
Output
with the nested generic type of 
In
. Consider the following code:
Copy code
class ConcreteInput : Input<String> { ... }
val output = registerForOutput<ConcreteInput, String>()
The code above provides a developer experience that is not ideal. A developer, despite knowing that 
ConcreteInput
uses 
String
as the generic type for its implementation of 
Input
, still needs to explicitly define 
String
as a secondary generic type of the call to 
registerForOutput
. This is only a minor inconvenience in the case that 
Input
has a single generic type, but in the case that 
Input
has two, three, or even more generic types, this becomes significantly less enjoyable to work with. I believe that this could be improved by including an "inferred" keyword, which is usable within generic type definitions. Consider the following code:
Copy code
fun <In: Input<inferred T>> registerForOutput(): Output<T> { ... }
In the code above, we state that 
T
, the generic type of the generic 
In
(the "nested generic" of 
In
) should be inferred by the compiler, meaning that it would be possible to write the following code, where the type out 
output
should be `Output<String>`:
Copy code
val output = registerForOutput<ConcreteInput>()
The following code should infer that the 
T
of 
registerForOutput
is 
Int
, and the type of 
output
should be `Output<Int>`:
Copy code
val output = registerForOutput<Input<Int>>()
The following code should infer that the 
T
of 
registerForOutput
is 
Nothing
, and the type of 
output
should be `Output<Nothing>`:
Copy code
val output = registerForOutput<Input<*>>()
Ideally, the 
inferred
keyword that I am suggesting should be compatible with 
reified
, so that it's possible to write the following:
Copy code
inline fun <In: Input<inferred reified T> registerForOutput(): Output<T> {
    println(T::class.java.simpleName)
    ...
}
I am interested to hear feedback on whether or not this makes sense (or is possible) as a language feature!
➕ 2
i
Starting from Kotlin 1.7, you will be able to avoid specifying individual type arguments that could be inferred by replacing them with 
_
. So the first call would look like:
Copy code
val output = registerForOutput<ConcreteInput, _>()
Not ideal yet, but avoids stating the inferred type.
i
That's a huge step in the right direction but in the case that a type has multiple generic type arguments, such as 
interface Input<A, B, C>
, this is still undesirable, as 
registerForOutput
would become 
registerForOutput<ConcreteType, _, _, _>
If the compiler is able to understand that 
_
is a valid argument, could the compiler completely avoid requiring the 
_
type arguments?
d
What if in your example 
In : Input<T>
will be the last type parameter of 
registerForOutput
, not first? How compiler can understand, that 
ConcreteInput
is type argument for last parameter?
i
In my example, with the addition of the 
inferred
keyword,
the 
registerForOutput
definition would only have a single type parameter:
Copy code
fun <In: Input<inferred A, inferred B, inferred C>> registerForOutput(): Output<A, B, C>
So it would not matter to the compiler - the compiler would attempt to infer the types of 
A
, 
B,
and 
C
, and if it failed to infer the types (for example, if the type was 
*
) it would result in a type of 
Nothing
.
r
i
Thanks for that link Ryan!
587 Views
Open in Slack
PreviousNext
Powered by