mix-in

What def, val, and var fields in Scala traits look like after they’re compiled (including the classes that extend them) alvin April 14, 2019 - 6:05pm
Table of Contents1 - def field in trait2 - val field in trait (abstract)3 - val field in trait (concrete)4 - var field in trait (abstract)5 - var field in trait (concrete)6 - An abstract class in the middle7 - A trait in the middle8 - Summary

I generally have a pretty good feel for how Scala traits work, and how they can be used for different needs. As one example, a few years ago I learned that it’s best to define abstract fields in traits using def. But there are still a few things I wonder about.

Today I had a few free moments and I decided to look at what happens under the covers when you use def, val, and var fields in traits, and then mix-in or extend those traits with classes. So I created some examples, compiled them with scalac -Xprint:all, and then decompiled them with JAD to see what everything looks like under the covers.

I was initially going to write a summary here, but if you want to know how things work under the hood, I think it helps to work through the examples, so for today I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

An example of stackable modifications in Scala

As a brief note today, here’s an example of stackable modifications in Scala.

Lately I was curious about what super means when you mix Scala traits into a class or object. A simplified answer is that super refers to the last trait that’s mixed in, though I should be careful and note that this is an oversimplification.

This can be demonstrated in an example that uses both inheritance and mixins with traits. Given this combination of traits and classes: