Scala 3 Opaque type aliases provide type abstractions without any overhead.
Let us assume we want to define a module that offers arithmetic on numbers, which are represented by their logarithm. This can be useful to improve precision when the numerical values involved tend to be very large, or close to zero.
Since it is important to distinguish “regular” double values from numbers stored as their logarithm, we introduce a class
class Logarithm(protected val underlying: Double): def toDouble: Double = math.exp(underlying) def + (that: Logarithm): Logarithm = // here we use the apply method on the companion Logarithm(this.toDouble + that.toDouble) def * (that: Logarithm): Logarithm = new Logarithm(this.underlying + that.underlying) object Logarithm: def apply(d: Double): Logarithm = new Logarithm(math.log(d))
The apply method on the companion object lets us create values of type
Logarithm which we can use as follows:
val l2 = Logarithm(2.0) val l3 = Logarithm(3.0) println((l2 * l3).toDouble) // prints 6.0 println((l2 + l3).toDouble) // prints 4.999...
While the class
Logarithm offers a nice abstraction for
Double values that are stored in this particular logarithmic form, it imposes severe performance overhead: For every single mathematical operation, we need to extract the underlying value and then wrap it again in a new instance of
Let us consider another approach to implement the same library.
This time instead of defining
Logarithm as a class, we define it using a type alias.
First, we define an abstract interface of our module:
trait Logarithms: type Logarithm // operations on Logarithm def add(x: Logarithm, y: Logarithm): Logarithm def mul(x: Logarithm, y: Logarithm): Logarithm // functions to convert between Double and Logarithm def make(d: Double): Logarithm def extract(x: Logarithm): Double // extension methods to use `add` and `mul` as "methods" on Logarithm extension (x: Logarithm) def toDouble: Double = extract(x) def + (y: Logarithm): Logarithm = add(x, y) def * (y: Logarithm): Logarithm = mul(x, y)
Now, let us implement this abstract interface by saying type
Logarithm is equal to
object LogarithmsImpl extends Logarithms: type Logarithm = Double // operations on Logarithm def add(x: Logarithm, y: Logarithm): Logarithm = make(x.toDouble + y.toDouble) def mul(x: Logarithm, y: Logarithm): Logarithm = x + y // functions to convert between Double and Logarithm def make(d: Double): Logarithm = math.log(d) def extract(x: Logarithm): Double = math.exp(x)
Within the implementation of
LogarithmsImpl, the equation
Logarithm = Double allows us to implement the various methods.
However, this abstraction is slightly leaky.
We have to make sure to only ever program against the abstract interface
Logarithms and never directly use
LogarithmsImpl would make the equality
Logarithm = Double visible for the user, who might accidentally use a
Double where a logarithmic double is expected.
import LogarithmsImpl._ val l: Logarithm = make(1.0) val d: Double = l // type checks AND leaks the equality!
Having to separate the module into an abstract interface and implementation can be useful, but is also a lot of effort, just to hide the implementation detail of
Programming against the abstract module
Logarithms can be very tedious and often requires the use of advanced features like path-dependent types, as in the following example:
def someComputation(L: Logarithms)(init: L.Logarithm): L.Logarithm = ...
Type abstractions, such as
type Logarithm erase to their bound (which is
Any in our case).
That is, although we do not need to manually wrap and unwrap the
Double value, there will be still some boxing overhead related to boxing the primitive type
Instead of manually splitting our
Logarithms component into an abstract part and into a concrete implementation, we can simply use opaque types in Scala 3 to achieve a similar effect:
object Logarithms: //vvvvvv this is the important difference! opaque type Logarithm = Double object Logarithm: def apply(d: Double): Logarithm = math.log(d) extension (x: Logarithm) def toDouble: Double = math.exp(x) def + (y: Logarithm): Logarithm = Logarithm(math.exp(x) + math.exp(y)) def * (y: Logarithm): Logarithm = x + y
The fact that
Logarithm is the same as
Double is only known in the scope where
Logarithm is defined, which in the above example corresponds to the object
The type equality
Logarithm = Double can be used to implement the methods (like
However, outside of the module the type
Logarithm is completely encapsulated, or “opaque.” To users of
Logarithm it is not possible to discover that
Logarithm is actually implemented as a
import Logarithms._ val l2 = Logarithm(2.0) val l3 = Logarithm(3.0) println((l2 * l3).toDouble) // prints 6.0 println((l2 + l3).toDouble) // prints 4.999... val d: Double = l2 // ERROR: Found Logarithm required Double
Even though we abstracted over
Logarithm, the abstraction comes for free:
Since there is only one implementation, at runtime there will be no boxing overhead for primitive types like
Summary of Opaque Types
Opaque types offer a sound abstraction over implementation details, without imposing performance overhead. As illustrated above, opaque types are convenient to use, and integrate very well with the Extension Methods feature.