Blog post about given prioritization changes

_posts/2024-08-19-given-priority-change-3.7.md

@@ -0,0 +1,256 @@
+---
+layout: blog-detail
+post-type: blog
+by: Oliver Bračevac, EPFL
+title: "Upcoming Changes to Givens in Scala 3.7"
+---
+
+## New Prioritization of Givens in Scala 3.7
+
+Scala 3.7 will introduce changes to how `given`s are resolved, which
+may affect program behavior when multiple `given`s are present. The
+aim of this change is to make `given` resolution more predictable, but
+it could lead to problems during migration to Scala 3.7 or later
+versions. In this article, we’ll explore the motivation behind these
+changes, potential issues, and provide migration guides to help
+developers prepare for the transition.
+
+### Motivation: Better Handling of Inheritance Triangles & Typeclasses
+
+The motivation for changing the prioritization of `given`s stems from
+the need to make interactions within inheritance hierarchies,
+particularly inheritance triangles, more intuitive. This adjustment
+addresses a common issue where the compiler struggles with ambiguity
+in complex typeclass hierarchies.
+
+For example, functional programmers will recognize the following
+inheritance triangle of common typeclasses:
+
+```scala
+trait Functor[F[_]]:
+ extension [A, B](x: F[A]) def map(f: A => B): F[B]
+trait Monad[F[_]] extends Functor[F] { ... }
+trait Traverse[F[_]] extends Functor[F] { ... }
+```
+Now, suppose we have corresponding instances of these typeclasses for `List`:
+```scala
+given Functor[List] = ...
+given Monad[List] = ...
+given Traverse[List] = ...
+```
+Let’s use these in the following context:
+```scala
+def fmap[F[_] : Functor, A, B](c: F[A])(f: A => B): F[B] = c.map(f)
+
+fmap(List(1,2,3))(_.toString)
+// ^ rejected by Scala < 3.7, now accepted by Scala 3.7
+```
+
+Before Scala 3.7, the compiler would reject the `fmap` call due to
+ambiguity. Since it prioritized the `given` instance with the _most
+specific_ subtype of the context bound `Functor`, both `Monad[List]`
+and `Traverse[List]` were valid candidates for `Functor[List]`, but
+neither was more specific than the other. However, all that’s required
+is the functionality of `Functor[List]`, the instance with the _most
+general_ subtype, which Scala 3.7 correctly picks.
+
+This change aligns the behavior of the compiler with the practical
+needs of developers, making the handling of common triangle
+inheritance patterns more predictable.
+
+### Source Incompatibility of the New Givens Prioritization
+
+While the new `given` prioritization improves predictability, it may
+affect source compatibility in existing Scala codebases. Let’s
+consider an example where a library provides a default `given` for a
+component:
+
+```scala
+// library code
+class LibComponent:
+ def msg = "library-defined"
+
+// default provided by library
+given libComponent: LibComponent = LibComponent()
+
+def printComponent(using c: LibComponent) = println(c.msg)
+```
+
+Up until Scala 3.6, clients of the library could override
+`libComponent` with a user-defined one through subtyping:
+
+```scala
+// client code
+class UserComponent extends LibComponent:
+ override def msg = "user-defined"
+
+given userComponent: UserComponent = UserComponent()
+
+@main def run = printComponent
+```
+
+Now, let’s run the example:
+
+```scala
+run // Scala <= 3.6: prints "user-defined"
+ // Scala 3.7: prints "library-defined"
+```
+
+What happened? In Scala 3.6 and earlier, the compiler prioritized the
+`given` with the _most specific_ compatible subtype
+(`userComponent`). However, in Scala 3.7, it selects the value with
+the _most general_ subtype instead (`libComponent`).
+
+This shift in prioritization can lead to unexpected changes in
+behavior when migrating to Scala 3.7, requiring developers to review
+and potentially adjust their codebases to ensure compatibility with
+the new `given` resolution logic. Below, we provide some tips to help
+with the migration process.
+
+## Migrating to the New Prioritization
+
+### Community Impact
+
+We have conducted experiments on the [open community
+build](https://github.com/VirtusLab/community-build3) that showed that
+the proposed scheme will result in a more intuitive and predictable
+`given` resolution. The negative impact on the existing projects is very
+small. We have tested 1500 open-source libraries, and new rules are
+causing problems for less than a dozen of them.
+
+### Roadmap
+
+The new `given` resolution scheme, which will be the default in Scala
+3.7, can already be explored in Scala 3.5. This early access allows
+the community ample time to test and adapt to the upcoming changes.
+
+**Scala 3.5**
+
+Starting with Scala 3.5, you can compile with `-source 3.6` to receive
+warnings if the new `given` resolution scheme would affect your
+code. This is how the warning might look:
+
+```scala
+-- Warning: client.scala:11:30 ------------------------------------------
+11 |@main def run = printComponent
+ | ^
+ | Given search preference for LibComponent between alternatives
+ | (userComponent : UserComponent)
+ | and
+ | (libComponent : LibComponent)
+ | has changed.
+ | Previous choice : the first alternative
+ | New choice from Scala 3.7: the second alternative
+```
+
+Additionally, you can compile with `-source 3.7` or `-source future`
+to fully enable the new prioritization and start experiencing its
+effects.
+
+**Scala 3.6**
+
+In Scala 3.6, these warnings will be on by default.
+
+**Scala 3.7**
+
+Scala 3.7 will finalize the transition, making the new `given`
+prioritization the standard behavior.
+
+#### Suppressing Warnings
+
+If you need to suppress the new warning related to changes in `given`
+search preference, you can use Scala’s facilities for configuring
+warnings. For example, you can suppress the warning globally via the
+command line:
+
+```bash
+scalac file.scala "-Wconf:msg=Given search preference:s"
+```
+
+It is also possible to selectively suppress the warning
+using the [`@nowarn` annotation](https://www.scala-lang.org/api/current/scala/annotation/nowarn.html):
+
+```scala
+import scala.annotation.nowarn
+
+class A
+class B extends A
+
+given A()
+given B()
+
+@nowarn("msg=Given search preference")
+val x = summon[A]
+```
+
+For more details, you can consult the guide on [configuring and suppressing warnings]({{ site.baseurl }}/2021/01/12/configuring-and-suppressing-warnings.html).
+
+**Caution**: Suppressing warnings should be viewed as a temporary
+workaround, not a long-term solution. While it can help address rare
+false positives from the compiler, it merely postpones the inevitable
+need to update your codebase or the libraries your project depends
+on. Relying on suppressed warnings may lead to unexpected issues when
+upgrading to future versions of the Scala compiler.
+
+### Workarounds
+
+Here are some practical strategies to help you smoothly adapt to the
+new `given` resolution scheme:
+
+#### Resorting to Explicit Parameters
+
+If the pre-3.7 behavior is preferred, you can explicitly pass the
+desired `given`:
+```scala
+@main def run = printComponent(using userComponent)
+```
+
+To determine the correct explicit parameter (which could involve a
+complex expression), it can be helpful to compile with an earlier
+Scala version using the `-Xprint:typer` flag:
+```scala
+scalac client.scala -Xprint:typer
+```
+This will output all parameters explicitly:
+```scala
+...
+@main def run: Unit = printComponent(userComponent)
+...
+```
+
+#### Explicit Prioritization by Owner
+
+One effective way to ensure that the most specific `given` instance is
+selected -— particularly useful when migrating libraries to Scala 3.7 -—
+is to leverage the inheritance rules as outlined in point 8 of [the
+language
+reference](https://docs.scala-lang.org/scala3/reference/changed-features/implicit-resolution.html):
+
+```scala
+class General
+class Specific extends General
+
+class LowPriority:
+ given a:General()
+
+object NormalPriority extends LowPriority:
+ given b:Specific()
+
+def run =
+ import NormalPriority.given
+ val x = summon[General]
+ val _: Specific = x // <- b was picked
+```
+
+The idea is to enforce prioritization through the inheritance
+hierarchies of classes that provide `given` instances. By importing the
+`given` instances from the object with the highest priority, you can
+control which instance is selected by the compiler.
+
+### Outlook
+
+We are considering adding `-rewrite` rules that automatically insert
+explicit parameters when a change in choice is detected.
+
+
+