Is this the proper way to initialize null references in Scala?

by

Alternatives

Use null as a last resort. As already mentioned, Option replaces most usages of null. If you using null to implement deferred initialisation of a field with some expensive calculation, you should use a lazy val.

Canonical initialisation to null

That said, Scala does support null. I personally use it in combination with Spring Dependency Injection.

Your code is perfectly valid. However, I suggest that you use var t: T = _ to initialize t to it’s default value. If T is a primitive, you get the default specific to the type. Otherwise you get null.

Not only is this more concise, but it is necessary when you don’t know in advance what T will be:

scala> class A[T] { var t: T = _ }
defined class A

scala> new A[String].t
res0: String = null

scala> new A[Object].t            
res1: java.lang.Object = null

scala> new A[Int].t   
res2: Int = 0

scala> new A[Byte].t
res3: Byte = 0

scala> new A[Boolean].t
res4: Boolean = false

scala> new A[Any].t   
res5: Any = null

Advanced

Using var t: T= null is a compile error if T is unbounded:

scala> class A[T] { var t: T = null }
<console>:5: error: type mismatch;
 found   : Null(null)
 required: T
       class A[T] { var t: T = null }

You can add an implicit parameter as evidence that T is nullable — a subtype of AnyRef not a subtype of NotNull This isn’t fully baked, even in Scala 2.8, so just consider it a curiousity for now. 

scala> class A[T](implicit ev: Null <:< T) { var t: T = null }           
defined class A

Leave a Comment

tech