Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • 14:27
    jxnu-liguobin synchronize #9706
  • 13:59
    smarter commented #9697
  • 13:53
    SethTisue edited #1461
  • 13:53
    SethTisue labeled #1461
  • 13:53
    SethTisue assigned #1461
  • 13:53
    SethTisue opened #1461
  • 13:49
    SethTisue edited #1460
  • 13:48
    SethTisue labeled #1460
  • 13:48
    SethTisue assigned #1460
  • 13:48
    SethTisue opened #1460
  • 13:47
    dwijnand commented #9697
  • 11:37
    som-snytt commented #12433
  • 11:24
    som-snytt commented #12434
  • 09:56

    lrytz on 2.13.x

    Inline Lifted.apply in condOpt Merge pull request #9709 from sā€¦ (compare)

  • 09:56
    lrytz closed #9709
  • 09:50
    dwijnand commented #12434
  • 09:20
    lrytz edited #12434
  • 09:19
    lrytz edited #12434
  • 09:18
    lrytz labeled #12434
  • 09:18
    lrytz milestoned #12434
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
"SOMEPRODUCT_12345_SOMEREGION_OLELS_SLSLS.z01" is the test input I'm testing right now
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
Deepak Singh
@dpk3d
@martijnhoekstra šŸ¤˜šŸ»šŸ˜Ž
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
@martijnhoekstra that ProductSubtype was actually supposed to be an optional group, but that didn't work either. Even as non-optional capture group, I get the match error
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
Extension is two groups
or rather, (Extension) is two groups
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
it is?
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
Either remove the parents around Extension, or around its interpolation
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
OH
jesus
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
regex, the bread and butter of programming help chat rooms :D
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
F* me
I spent 2-3 hours on this
That was the issue
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
:+1:
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
Really appreciate it
Deepak Singh
@dpk3d
@martijnhoekstra totally agreed dude
Rob Norris
@tpolecat
We need an AI that helps people with regexes.
And another that helps people with cats imports.
(That one could be very simple.)
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
in fact, I bet I could write a regex for the second one
Rob Norris
@tpolecat
Synergy.
Martijn Hoekstra
@martijnhoekstra
it's kinda lame that you "just" get a match exception, but I don't think you can actually do better
Fabio Labella
@SystemFw
just replaced some regexes with atto, quite pleasant
Rob Norris
@tpolecat
:-)
Eric Peters
@er1c
I have a signature like: def makeAndSetIterableField[V, T <: Iterable[V], F <: ScalarFormField[T]](attrRef: AttributeRef[T], field: F): AttributesFormField[T] that I want to use via: makeAndSetIterableField(attrRef.cast(t) /* Set[Int] */, text[Int](key, name, includeUseValueCheckbox = true)) without being explicit with type parameters makeAndSetIterableField[Int, Set[Int], ...](attrRef.cast(t) /* Set[Int] */, text[Int](key, name, includeUseValueCheckbox = true)) ... I could change the signature to something like: def makeAndSetIterableField[V, T <: Iterable[V], F <: ScalarFormField[T]](attrRef: AttributeRef[_ <: Iterable[V]], field: F): AttributesFormField[T] but then I lose the type T in the attrRef. What am I missing? (and ignore the cast red flag :)
Is this where something like (implicit tag: TypeTag[V]) would help? I guess I could try lol
Sciss
@Sciss
@er1c is V actually used in the method? If not you can remove it and just write T <: Iterable[Any] since Iterable is covariant in its type-parameter.
likewise with the other parameters; if you can make them covariant, you might be able to get rid of T <: Iterable. And again F. Is it important that it is more specific than ScalarFormField? If not, scrap it, and just write field: ScalarFormField[T]
Eric Peters
@er1c
thanks, that gives me some ideas to play with
Ryan Peters
@sloshy

And another that helps people with cats imports.

@tpolecat I'm imagining a The IT Crowd style "Hello, IT... Have you tried import cats.implicits._?" for every new user who joins the chat

Gavin Bisesi
@Daenyth
Don't forget partial-unification :)
Ryan Peters
@sloshy
Actual bot prototype footage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtXtIivRRKQ
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
is the only reason not to use case classes is because of the performance/memory overhead?
Ryan Peters
@sloshy
@DanielGGordon Sometimes you don't want to provide all of the things case classes do. For example say you have a class that acts as a kind of "refined" type, like a user who most definitely exists. If you base it off of case class you technically still have the copy method available so you could change it to be a user who does not actually exist. So then it's a matter of discipline on whether or not your data is correct anyway.
Rob Norris
@tpolecat
@sloshy we tried that in the header for -Ypartial-unification and it didn't really work.
Ryan Peters
@sloshy
:(
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
@sloshy oh also maybe you might not want to provide setters. case classes come with setters don't they?
Is there like a list of which methods are generated from case class? Like I know generally speaking getters, setters, apply, unapply, hashcode and toEquals.
Gavin Bisesi
@Daenyth
Setters?
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
yeah maybe that doesn't make sense
Gavin Bisesi
@Daenyth
yeah
It doesn't so much define getters either, just that the constructor items are public instead of private by default
Ryan Peters
@sloshy
copy lets you do an immutable shallow copy of one case class instance to another so that might be what you are thinking.
Gavin Bisesi
@Daenyth
It gives you equals, hashcode, copy, Product with Serializable, apply, and unapply
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon
I was thinking about the constructor I think
Ryan Peters
@sloshy
i.e. myCaseClass.copy(name = "newName")
Case classes are best whenever you just have "some data with a shape to it", and if you need more control over how that works a class can work better. Usually (95% of the time) I go with case classes because they're so convenient.
Daniel Gordon
@DanielGGordon

Found a summary that said:

apply
unapply
accessor methods are created for each constructor parameter
copy
equals and hashCode
toString

Ryan Peters
@sloshy
I wouldn't know anything about efficiency. I don't think it's an issue until it's an issue for you. Profile and whatnot if you have to.