In type theory, an intersection type can be allocated to values that can be assigned both the type
\sigma
\tau
\sigma\cap\tau
Intersection types are composite data types. Similar to product types, they are used to assign several types to an object.However, product types are assigned to tuples, so that each tuple element is assigned a particular product type component. In comparison, underlying objects of intersection types are not necessarily composite. A restricted form of intersection types are refinement types.
Intersection types are useful for describing overloaded functions.[2] For example, if is the type of function taking a number as an argument and returning a number, and is the type of function taking a string as an argument and returning a string, then the intersection of these two types can be used to describe (overloaded) functions that do one or the other, based on what type of input they are given.
Contemporary programming languages, including Ceylon, Flow, Java, Scala, TypeScript, and Whiley (see comparison of languages with intersection types), use intersection types to combine interface specifications and to express ad hoc polymorphism.Complementing parametric polymorphism, intersection types may be used to avoid class hierarchy pollution from cross-cutting concerns and reduce boilerplate code, as shown in the TypeScript example below.
The type theoretic study of intersection types is referred to as the intersection type discipline.[3] Remarkably, program termination can be precisely characterized using intersection types.[4]
TypeScript supports intersection types, improving expressiveness of the type system and reducing potential class hierarchy size, demonstrated as follows.
The following program code defines the classes,, and that each have a method returning an object of either type,, or .Additionally, the functions and require arguments of type and, respectively.
// produces eggsclass Chicken
// produces milkclass Cow
// produces a random numberclass RandomNumberGenerator
// requires an eggfunction eatEgg(egg: Egg)
// requires milkfunction drinkMilk(milk: Milk)
The following program code defines the ad hoc polymorphic function that invokes the member function of the given object .The function has two type annotations, namely and, connected via the intersection type constructor .Specifically, when applied to an argument of type returns an object of type type, and when applied to an argument of type returns an object of type type .Ideally, should not be applicable to any object having (possibly by chance) a method.
Finally, the following program code demonstrates type safe use of the above definitions.
console.log(chicken.produce); // Egg console.log(cow.produce); // Milk console.log(randomNumberGenerator.produce); //0.2626353555444987
console.log(animalToFood(chicken)); // Egg console.log(animalToFood(cow)); // Milk //console.log(animalToFood(randomNumberGenerator)); // ERROR: Argument of type 'RandomNumberGenerator' is not assignable to parameter of type 'Cow'
console.log(eatEgg(animalToFood(chicken))); // I ate an egg.//console.log(eatEgg(animalToFood(cow))); // ERROR: Argument of type 'Milk' is not assignable to parameter of type 'Egg'console.log(drinkMilk(animalToFood(cow))); // I drank some milk.//console.log(drinkMilk(animalToFood(chicken))); // ERROR: Argument of type 'Egg' is not assignable to parameter of type 'Milk'The above program code has the following properties:
The above minimalist example can be realized using inheritance, for instance by deriving the classes and from a base class .However, in a larger setting, this could be disadvantageous.Introducing new classes into a class hierarchy is not necessarily justified for cross-cutting concerns, or maybe outright impossible, for example when using an external library. Imaginably, the above example could be extended with the following classes:
This may require additional classes (or interfaces) specifying whether a produce method is available, whether the produce method returns food, and whether the produce method can be used repeatedly.Overall, this may pollute the class hierarchy.
The above minimalist example already shows that duck typing is less suited to realize the given scenario.While the class contains a method, the object should not be a valid argument for .The above example can be realized using duck typing, for instance by introducing a new field to the classes and signifying that objects of corresponding type are valid arguments for .However, this would not only increase the size of the respective classes (especially with the introduction of more methods similar to), but is also a non-local approach with respect to .
The above example can be realized using function overloading, for instance by implementing two methods and .In TypeScript, such a solution is almost identical to the provided example. Other programming languages, such as Java, require distinct implementations of the overloaded method.This may lead to either code duplication or boilerplate code.
The above example can be realized using the visitor pattern.It would require each animal class to implement an method accepting an object implementing the interface (adding non-local boilerplate code).The function would be realized as the method of an implementation of .Unfortunately, the connection between the input type (or) and the result type (or) would be difficult to represent.
On the one hand, intersection types can be used to locally annotate different types to a function without introducing new classes (or interfaces) to the class hierarchy.On the other hand, this approach requires all possible argument types and result types to be specified explicitly.If the behavior of a function can be specified precisely by either a unified interface, parametric polymorphism, or duck typing, then the verbose nature of intersection types is unfavorable.Therefore, intersection types should be considered complementary to existing specification methods.
A dependent intersection type, denoted
(x:\sigma)\cap\tau
\tau
x
M
(x:\sigma)\cap\tau
M
\sigma
\tau[x:=M]
\tau[x:=M]
x
\tau
M
Scala supports type declarations [6] as object members. This allows a type of an object member to depend on the value of another member, which is called a path-dependent type.[7] For example, the following program text defines a Scala trait
Let
\langlesf{x}:\sigma\rangle
sf{x}
\sigma
(x:\langlesf{T}:Type\rangle)\cap\langlesf{value}:x.sf{T}\rangle
\langlesf{T}:Type\rangle
\langlesf{value}:sf{booleanWitness.T}\rangle
\langlesf{T}:Type\rangle\cap\langlesf{value}:sf{booleanWitness.T}\rangle
(x:\langlesf{T}:Type\rangle)\cap\langlesf{value}:x.sf{T}\rangle
Alternatively, the above minimalistic example can be described using dependent record types.[9] In comparison to dependent intersection types, dependent record types constitute a strictly more specialized type theoretic concept.[5]
An intersection of a type family, denoted , is a dependent type in which the type
\tau
x
M
N
\sigma
M
\tau[x:=N]
N
| Language | Actively developed | Paradigm(s) | Status | Features | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [11] | [12] | Additionally, generic type parameters can have constraints that require their (monomorphized) type-arguments to implement multiple interfaces, whereupon the runtime type represented by the generic type parameter becomes an intersection-type of all listed interfaces. | |||
| [13] | [14] |
| |||
| [15] | [16] | ||||
| Flow | [17] | [18] |
| ||
| [19] |
| ||||
| [20] | [21] |
| |||
| [22] | [23] |
| |||
| [24] | [25] [26] |
| |||
| [27] | [28] |
| |||
| [29] | [30] |