How do I create an explicit companion object for a

Question

I have a case class defined as such:

case class StreetSecondary(designator: String, value: Option[String])

I then define an explicit companion object:

object StreetSecondary {
  //empty for now
}

The act of defining the explicit companion object StreetSecondary causes the compiler produced "implicit companion object" to be lost; i.e. replaced with no ability to access the compiler produced version. For example, the tupled method is available on case class StreetSecondary via this implicit companion object. However, once I define the explicit companion object, the tupled method is "lost".

So, what do I need to define/add/change to the above StreetSecondary explicit companion object to regain all the functionality lost with the replacement of the compiler provided implicit companion object? And I want more than just the tupled method restored. I want all functionality (for example, including extractor/unapply) restored.

Thank you for any direction/guidance you can offer.

---

UPDATE 1

I have done enough searching to discover several things:

A) The explicit companion object must be defined BEFORE its case class (at least that is the case in the Eclipse Scala-IDE WorkSheet, and the code doesn't work in the IntelliJ IDE's WorkSheet regardless of which comes first).

B) There is a technical trick to force tupled to work (thank you drstevens): (StreetSecondary.apply _).tupled While that solves the specific tupled method problem, it still doesn't accurately or completely describe what the scala compiler is providing in the implicit companion object.

C) Finally, the explicit companion object can be defined to extend a function which matches the signature of the parameters of the primary constructor and returns an instance of the case class. It looks like this:

object StreetSecondary extends ((String, Option[String]) => StreetSecondary) {
  //empty for now
}

Again, I am still not confident accurately or completely describes what the scala compiler is providing in the implicit companion object.

Answer 1

Why would you think you are loosing them?

case class Person(name: String, age: Int)
object Person {
  def apply(): Person = new Person("Bob", 33)
}

val alice = Person("Alice", 20)
val bob   = Person()

Person.unapply(alice)    //Option[(String, Int)] = Some((Alice,20))
Person.unapply(Person()) //Option[(String, Int)] = Some((Bob,33))

Seems like I still got extractors.

In your case you still got it all:

scala> StreetSecondary.unapply _
res10: StreetSecondary => Option[(String, Option[String])] = <function1>

Answer 2

Scala 2.11.0

It looks like scalac is predefining the tupled function when you aren't providing additional functions in the companion

case class BB(a: Int, b: Int)
object BB { }

case class AA(a: Int, b: Int)

object CC { }
case class CC(a: Int, b: Int)

results in the following

public class AA implements scala.Product,scala.Serializable {
  public static scala.Option<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>> unapply(AA);
  public static AA apply(int, int);
  public static scala.Function1<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>, AA> tupled();
  public static scala.Function1<java.lang.Object, scala.Function1<java.lang.Object, AA>> curried();
  public int a();
  public int b();
  public AA copy(int, int);
  public int copy$default$1();
  public int copy$default$2();
  public java.lang.String productPrefix();
  public int productArity();
  public java.lang.Object productElement(int);
  public scala.collection.Iterator<java.lang.Object> productIterator();
  public boolean canEqual(java.lang.Object);
  public int hashCode();
  public java.lang.String toString();
  public boolean equals(java.lang.Object);
  public AA(int, int);
}

public final class AA$ extends scala.runtime.AbstractFunction2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object, AA> implements scala.Serializable {
  public static final AA$ MODULE$;
  public static {};
  public final java.lang.String toString();
  public AA apply(int, int);
  public scala.Option<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>> unapply(AA);
  public java.lang.Object apply(java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object);
}

public class BB implements scala.Product,scala.Serializable {
  public static scala.Option<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>> unapply(BB);
  public static BB apply(int, int);
  public int a();
  public int b();
  public BB copy(int, int);
  public int copy$default$1();
  public int copy$default$2();
  public java.lang.String productPrefix();
  public int productArity();
  public java.lang.Object productElement(int);
  public scala.collection.Iterator<java.lang.Object> productIterator();
  public boolean canEqual(java.lang.Object);
  public int hashCode();
  public java.lang.String toString();
  public boolean equals(java.lang.Object);
  public BB(int, int);
}

public final class BB$ implements scala.Serializable {
  public static final BB$ MODULE$;
  public static {};
  public BB apply(int, int);
  public scala.Option<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>> unapply(BB);
}

public class CC implements scala.Product,scala.Serializable {
  public static scala.Option<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>> unapply(CC);
  public static CC apply(int, int);
  public int a();
  public int b();
  public CC copy(int, int);
  public int copy$default$1();
  public int copy$default$2();
  public java.lang.String productPrefix();
  public int productArity();
  public java.lang.Object productElement(int);
  public scala.collection.Iterator<java.lang.Object> productIterator();
  public boolean canEqual(java.lang.Object);
  public int hashCode();
  public java.lang.String toString();
  public boolean equals(java.lang.Object);
  public CC(int, int);
}

public final class CC$ implements scala.Serializable {
  public static final CC$ MODULE$;
  public static {};
  public CC apply(int, int);
  public scala.Option<scala.Tuple2<java.lang.Object, java.lang.Object>> unapply(CC);
}

Answer 3

When defining an explicit companion object for a case class (as of Scala 2.11), to fully replace the compiler provided functionality in the lost implicit companion object, the basic template for the explicit companion object has two requirements:

Requirements:
1. Must extend a function definition which consists of a tuple (exactly matching the type and order of the case class constructor parameters) returning the type of the case class
2. Must override the toString function to provide the object class name (identical to that of the associated case class)

Here's the original example code for the "empty" explicit companion object:

object StreetSecondary {
  //empty for now
}

And here is the example code after implementing the above requirements:

object StreetSecondary extends ((String, Option[String]) => StreetSecondary) {
    //replace the toString implementation coming from the inherited class (FunctionN)
    override def toString =
      getClass.getName.split("""\$""").reverse.dropWhile(x => {val char = x.take(1).head; !((char == '_') || char.isLetter)}).head
}

To meet requirement 1 above, extends ((String, Option[String]) => StreetSecondary) is inserted right after the object name and before the first curly brace.

To meet requirement 2 above, override def toString = getClass.getName.split("""\$""").reverse.dropWhile(x => {val char = x.take(1).head; !((char == '_') || char.isLetter)}).head is inserted in the body of the object (the explicit implementation remains questionable)

Deep appreciation to @drstevens for his posting the javap output to help me gain confidence the above two steps are all that are required to restore the lost functionality.