Question

Here is something that I have came across in Scala that did not cause any problems in Java. Now I just do not know what is the right way of doing this in Scala.

Problem description: I have a Scala Object which denotes an ‘abstract’ object. It is intended to have a singletonic profile but it is not intended for real use, it is just a bunch of definitions common to it’s children-singletons. So instead, I want to use it’s children. So there comes the question: since I cannot inherit objects, should the common singleton functionality be realized as a class? As an abstract class? Trait does not suit me because it can’t have constructors.
If an abstract parent class would do, then how should I access it’s singleton (or static) methods if I need them anythere?
I realize that there might be a flaw in my design, but since I have this question and can’t think of any definitive answer, it is interesting to hear what you say (including design alternatives).

Answer 1

You really should be using a trait; there is no need for constructors (and, indeed, they make no sense because a scala object has no constructor):

Here’s the shared trait; needA is the value you need to pass to your constructor. That is, it is required by the functionality of the trait.

trait Common {
  def needA: A

  def sharedMethod { /* implement me*/ }
}

Then your modules look like this:

object Mod1 extends Common {
  val needA = { /* implement me*/ }
}     
object Mod2 extends Common {
  val needA = { /* implement me*/ }
}     

Notice that they specify the required values for the common functionality by using a val to override a def