scala reflection

Question

I want to create a hashmap to store parameters names and their values. The parameters however are with different types. I could use HashMap[String, Any], but I wouldn't know which types they are later on. Is there anyway I can recovery the type information? Or is there any better way to store pair?

Answer 1

Do you want access to the static type information, or the dynamic type information? If you're after the former, you can use typed keys. Something along these lines should work:

final class Key[T]

object Registry {
   private var backingMap: Map[Key[_], _] = Map.empty

   def put[T](k: Key[T], v: T) = backingMap += (k -> v)

   def get[T](k: Key[T]): Option[T] = backingMap get k map (_.asInstanceOf[T])
}

scala> val strKey = new Key[String] 
strKey: Key[String] = Key@31028a

scala> val intKey = new Key[Int]
intKey: Key[Int] = Key@7ae77ca4

scala> Registry.put(strKey, "asdf")

scala> Registry.get(strKey)
res0: Option[String] = Some(asdf)

scala> Registry.put(intKey, "asdf")
<console>:10: error: type mismatch;
 found   : Key[Int]
 required: Key[Any]
       Registry.put(intKey, "asdf")

Alternately, you can use untyped keys and store the type information in the Map using manifests (as Daniel suggested):

class Registry[K] {
   import scala.reflect.Manifest

   private var _map= Map.empty[K,(Manifest[_], Any)] 

   def put[T](key: K, item: T)(implicit m: Manifest[T]) {
      _map += (key -> (m, item))
   }

   def get[T](key:K)(implicit m : Manifest[T]): Option[T] = {
      for ((om, v) <- _map get key if om <:< m) 
         yield v.asInstanceOf[T]
   }
}

The latter approach has the advantage that you can use anything as a key, and you don't have to pass the original typed key objects around. However, it has the drawback that you must specify the value type when you call the get method. If you specify the wrong type you'll get None just as if the key is not in the Registry at all, whereas with typed keys you're guaranteed to get any value associated with a key.

Answer 2

See this, which implements exactly what you ask for.

Answer 3

If you don't have too many values, you may consider using a HList of Pairs or similar constructs.