Scala: Pattern matching when one of two items meets some condition

Question

I\'m often writing code that compares two objects and produces a value based on whether they are the same, or different, based on how they are different.

So I might writ

Answer 1

Since you already matched against (Some(x), Some(y)), you may match against (None, None) explicitly, and the remaining cases are (Some(x), None) and (None, Some(y)):

def decide [T](v1: Option[T], v2:Option[T]) = (v1, v2) match {
  case (Some (x), Some (y)) => "a"
  case (None, None)         => "c"
  case _                    => "b"
}

val ni : Option [Int] = None 
decide (ni, ni)            // c
decide (Some (4), Some(3)) // a
decide (ni, Some (3))      // b
decide (Some (4), ni)      // b

Answer 2

You should be able to do it if you define it as a val first:

val MyValThatIsCapitalized = new OneAndOnlyOne(v: Option[Foo] => v.isDefined )
val result = (v1,v2) match {
  case (Some(value1), Some(value2)) => "a"
  case MyValThatIsCapitalized(value) => "b"
  case _ = > "c"
}

As implied by the name, the name of the val containing the extractor object must be capitalized.

Answer 3

On Scala 2.8:

val result = List(v1,v2).flatten match {
  case List(value1, value2) => "a"
  case List(value) => "b"
  case _ = > "c"
}

On Scala 2.7, however, you need a type hint to make it work. So, assuming value is Int, for instance, then:

val result = (List(v1,v2).flatten : List[Int]) match {
  case List(value1, value2) => "a"
  case List(value) => "b"
  case _ = > "c"
}

The funny thing about it is that I misread "first" as "list" on Mitch Blevins answer, and that gave me this idea. :-)

Answer 4

How about this:

    Welcome to Scala version 2.8.0.r20327-b20091230020149 (Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM, Java 1.6.0_17).
Type in expressions to have them evaluated.
Type :help for more information.

scala> def m(v1: Any,v2: Any) = (v1,v2) match {
     |     case (Some(x),Some(y)) => "a"
     |     case (Some(_),None) | (None,Some(_)) => "b"
     |     case _ => "c"
     | }
m: (v1: Any,v2: Any)java.lang.String

scala> m(Some(1),Some(2))
res0: java.lang.String = a

scala> m(Some(1),None)
res1: java.lang.String = b

scala> m(None,None)
res2: java.lang.String = c

scala>

Answer 5

I think you're asking two slightly different questions.

One question is how to use "or" in switch statements. || doesn't work; | does. And you can't use variables in that case (because in general they might match different types, which renders the type confusing). So:

def matcher[T](a: (T,T)) = {
  a match {
    case (Some(x),Some(y)) => "both"
    case (Some(_),None) | (None,Some(_)) => "either"
    case _ => "none"
  }
}

Another question is how to avoid having to do this over and over, especially if you want to be able to get at the value in the tuple. I've implemented a version here for Option, but you could use an unwrapped tuple and a boolean.

One trick to achieve this is that to prewrap the values before you start matching on it, and then use your own matching constructs that do what you want. For instance,

class DiOption[+T] {
  def trinary = this
}
case class Both[T](first: T, second:T) extends DiOption[T] { }
case class OneOf[T](it: T) extends DiOption[T] { }
case class Neither() extends DiOption[Nothing] { }
implicit def sometuple2dioption[T](t2: (Option[T],Option[T])): DiOption[T] = {
  t2 match {
    case (Some(x),Some(y)) => Both(x,y)
    case (Some(x),None) => OneOf(x)
    case (None,Some(y)) => OneOf(y)
    case _ => Neither()
  }
}

// Example usage
val a = (Some("This"),None)
a trinary match {
  case Both(s,t) => "Both"
  case OneOf(s) => "Just one"
  case _ => "Nothing"
}

Answer 6

If you have to support arbitrary predicates you can derive from this (which is based on Daniel's idea):

List(v1, v2) filter (_ %2 == 0) match {
    case List(value1, value2) => "a"
    case List(value) => "b"
    case _ => "c"
}

the definition of the function:

def filteredMatch[T,R](values : T*)(f : T => Boolean)(p: PartialFunction[List[T], R]) : R = 
    p(List((values filter f) :_* ))

Now you can use it like this:

filteredMatch(v1,v2)(_ %2 == 0){
    case List(value1, value2) => "a"
    case List(value) => "b"
    case _ => "c"
}

I'm not so sure if it's a good idea (i.e. readable). But a neat exercise nonetheless.

It would be nice if you could match on tuples: case (value1, value2) => ... instead of lists.