Case Class Factory Constructor Inlining Fails to Invoke Companion Constructor

[scabug]

See the following paste. It appears that the inlining of case class constructors/deconstructors fails to invoke the constructor for the companion object, which is counter to the specification.

Welcome to Scala version 2.10.0.rdev-4009-2011-12-13-g6912ff8 (Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM, Java 1.6.0_29).
Type in expressions to have them evaluated.
Type :help for more information.

scala> :paste
// Entering paste mode (ctrl-D to finish)

case class Test(a: Int)
object Test {
  println("here")
}

// Exiting paste mode, now interpreting.

defined class Test
defined module Test

scala> val Test(a) = Test(42)
a: Int = 42

scala> Test
here
res0: Test.type = Test$@78da5318

[scabug]

Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-5304?orig=1 Reporter: @djspiewak Affected Versions: 2.10.0 See #4859

[scabug]

@lrytz said: Spec 5.4 says

bq. The new m$cls constructor is evaluated not at the point of the object definition, but is instead evaluated the first time m is dereferenced during execution of the program (which might be never at all).

[scabug]

@adriaanm said: companion objects may have side effects, caveat inliner

[scabug]

@som-snytt said: Cheap workaround:

case class Shu(value: Int) { Shu }

Less cheap:

case class Ma(value: Int)(implicit dummy: Ma.type = Ma)

I noticed that the transform is done in RefChecks, and it's so simple and clean that you want to spec it and say Test(42) is a sweetened new Test(42).

But I also see that simple sugars are unhealthy:

case class Zi private (value: Int)
object Test { 
  //val z2 = new Zi(19) // obviously not
  val z = Zi(17)  // error: constructor Zi in class Zi cannot be accessed in object Test
} 

I see I can't supply a custom non-synthetic apply to short-circuit the optimization either; the spec does say that you can roll your own copy method.

[scabug]

@magarciaEPFL said: I've looked at the bytecode emitted with and without -optimize, for each of the scenarios below:

• Test is a case class Test(42) Outcome: doesn't invoke the companion object's constructor
• Test is a non-case class new Test(42) Outcome: doesn't invoke the companion object's constructor

Now, let's turn this around. Instead of having me show the above is per-spec, can you provide a counter-argument? Which place in the spec mentions the above should behave differently?

[scabug]

@djspiewak said: Test(42) should be semantically equivalent to val t = Test; t.apply(42). Or, equivalently, val t = Test; val x = t.x; t.apply(42). If x is free of side-effects, then all of these should be semantically equivalent. However, the first one will fail to invoke the companion object constructor, while the third (and I believe the second) will.

[scabug]

@retronym said: My proposed fix for #4859 stopped just short of fixing this problem, but it shows all the places that need to be touched when we decide to do so.

[scabug]

@retronym said: I discussed this with Martin recently, his thoughts:

• Accessing a nested Java static classes doesn't run the static initializer of the enclosing class
• People might be surprised by a performance difference between nested and top level modules
• But, the arguments for forcing initialization do make sense.
• We might investigate a scheme in which the constructor of a nested module initializes it's enclosing module. This would give us the desired semantics without the penalty of the outer module load at every access of the nested module.

[scabug]

@retronym said: Rescheduling for 2.11, I don't want to change the semantics for a minor release.

[scabug]

@retronym said: Another example. This stems from use of isExprSafeToInline in Erasure#unbox1.

topic/typer-crash-cleanup /code/scala tail sandbox/{t1,c}.scala
==> sandbox/t1.scala <==
object T { println("!!!"); val x: Unit = () }
==> sandbox/c.scala <==
object C {
  def main(args: Array[String]) {
    Some[Unit](T.x)
  }
}
topic/typer-crash-cleanup /code/scala qbin/scalac -d sandbox -Xprint:erasure sandbox/{t1,c}.scala
[[syntax trees at end of                   erasure]] // t1.scala
package <empty> {
  object T extends Object {
    def <init>(): T.type = {
      T.super.<init>();
      ()
    };
    private[this] val x: scala.runtime.BoxedUnit = scala.runtime.BoxedUnit.UNIT;
    <stable> <accessor> def x(): Unit = ()
  }
}

 // c.scala
package <empty> {
  object C extends Object {
    def <init>(): C.type = {
      C.super.<init>();
      ()
    };
    def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = {
      new Some(scala.runtime.BoxedUnit.UNIT);
      ()
    }
  }
}

[SethTisue]

another, related example in #8666 (which I'm closing, let's consolidate here)

[SethTisue]

another, related example in #9115 (which I'm closing, let's consolidate here)

[som-snytt]

This use case is fixed in dotty (constructor proxy) but 9115 is not (nested static class init).

[SethTisue]

I've reopened #9115.