Home/ Questions/Q 8472639
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-06-10T17:07:54+00:00

Is it safe to assume that: because scala.AnyRef defines toString() and hashCode() with a

  • 0

Is it safe to assume that:

because scala.AnyRef defines toString() and hashCode() with a pair of parenthesis due to interoperability with Java (as suggested by Martin in: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/scala-language/RlV9O1RDmis),

every single class in the Scala standard library that is a descendent of scala.AnyRef defines toString() and hashCode() with a pair of parenthesis ?

In other words, can I trust that the developers of the standard library were consistent in using toString() and hashCode() for the descendent classes of AnyRef?

Edit – changed the question to ask only for descendent classes of AnyRef

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    Since all you need is one counterexample, here you go:

    object Int extends AnyValCompanion {
  ...
  override def toString = "object scala.Int"
}

    But grepping for "toString[^(]" on the standard library source turns up hundreds of others.

    Note that the ability to override a method with an empty parameter list with a parameterless one was explicitly added to the Scala language specification in Scala 2.0.

    • 0