Common ground in Groovy, Scala, and Clojure, Part 1

Explore how these next-generation JVM languages handle operator overloading

The languages (Groovy, Scala, and Clojure) have more commonalities than differences, converging toward common ground in many of their features and conveniences. This installment explores how they each address a longstanding deficiency in the Java language the inability to overload operators. It also discusses the related concepts of associativity and precedence.

16 Apr 2013 - Added links to "The languages" and "Common ground in Groovy, Scala, and Clojure, Part 2" in Resources.

14 May 2013 - Added a link to "Common ground in Groovy, Scala, and Clojure, Part 3" in Resources.

Neal Ford, Director / Software Architect / Meme Wrangler, ThoughtWorks Inc.

Neal FordNeal Ford is Director, Software Architect, and Meme Wrangler at ThoughtWorks, a global IT consultancy. He is also the designer and developer of applications, instructional materials, magazine articles, courseware, and video/DVD presentations, and he is the author or editor of books spanning a variety of technologies, including the most recent Presentation Patterns. He focuses on designing and building large-scale enterprise applications. He is also an internationally acclaimed speaker at developer conferences worldwide. Check out his website.

14 May 2013 (First published 12 March 2013)

Also available in Chinese Russian Japanese

About this series

The Java legacy will be the platform, not the language. More than 200 languages run on the JVM, each bringing interesting new capabilities beyond the capabilities of the Java language. This series explores three next-generation JVM languages — Groovy, Scala, and Clojure — comparing and contrasting new capabilities and paradigms. The series aims to give Java developers a glimpse into their own near future — and help them make educated choices about the time they devote to new-language learning.

Good ideas in programming languages persist and spread to other languages, permeating them over time. Thus, unsurprisingly, the languages — Groovy, Scala, and Clojure — share many common features. In this and upcoming installments, I explore how the convergence of function manifests in the syntax of each. I start with a feature — the ability to overload operators — that makes up for a longstanding deficiency in the Java language.

Operator overloading

If you ever dabble with the Java BigDecimal class, you probably see code similar to Listing 1:

Listing 1. Lackluster BigDecimal support in Java code
BigDecimal op1 = new BigDecimal(1e12);
BigDecimal op2 = new BigDecimal(2.2e9);
// (op1 + (op2 * 2)) / (op1/(op1 + (op2 * 1.5e2))
BigDecimal lhs = op1.add(op2.multiply(BigDecimal.valueOf(2)));
BigDecimal rhs = op1.divide(
BigDecimal result = lhs.divide(rhs);
System.out.println(String.format("%,.2f", result));

In Listing 1, I try to fulfill the formula that I listed as a comment. In Java programming, I cannot overload mathematical operators, forcing me to fall back on method invocations. Static imports can help, but a clear need exists for appropriate operator overloading for selected contexts. The original Java engineers purposely omitted operator overloading from the language, feeling that it added too much complexity. But experience shows that the complexity forced on developers by the lack of this feature outweighs the potential abuse opportunities.

In slightly different ways, all three of the languages implement operator overloading.

Scala's operators

Scala allows operator overloading by discarding the distinction between operators and methods. Operators are merely methods with special names. To override the multiplication operator, for example, you override the * method. [* is a valid method name, which is one reason that Scala uses the underscore (_) character for imports rather than the Java asterisk (*) character.]

I use complex numbers to illustrate overloading. Complex numbers are a mathematical notation that includes both a real part and imaginary part, typically written as, for example, 3 + 4i (see Resources). Complex numbers are common in many scientific fields, including engineering, physics, electromagnetism, and chaos theory. Listing 2 shows the Scala implementation of complex numbers:

Listing 2. Scala complex numbers
final class Complex(val real: Int, val imaginary: Int) {
  require (real != 0 || imaginary != 0)

  def +(operand: Complex) =
      new Complex(real + operand.real, imaginary + operand.imaginary)

  def +(operand: Int) =
    new Complex(real + operand, imaginary)

  def -(operand: Complex) =
    new Complex(real - operand.real, imaginary - operand.imaginary)

  def -(operand: Int) =
    new Complex(real - operand, imaginary)

  def *(operand: Complex) =
      new Complex(real * operand.real - imaginary * operand.imaginary,
          real * operand.imaginary + imaginary * operand.real)

  override def toString() =
      real + (if (imaginary < 0) "" else "+") + imaginary + "i"

  override def equals(that: Any) = that match {
    case other : Complex => (real == other.real) && (imaginary == other.imaginary)
    case _ => false

  override def hashCode(): Int =
    41 * ((41 + real) + imaginary)

equals() and the match keyword

Another interesting feature in Listing 2 is the use of pattern matching within the equals() method. Although type casting is possible in Scala, matching against type is more common. The that parameter is declared as Any — Scala's top of the inheritance hierarchy. The method's body consists of the match call, which checks the value of the fields when the passed type matches and defaults to false otherwise.

Scala simplifies much of the verbosity in the Java language by collapsing needless scaffolding. For example, in Listing 2, the constructor parameters and fields in the class appear with the class definition. The body of the class acts as the constructor in this case, so the call to the require() method validates the presence of values as the first instantiation action. Because Scala automatically provides fields, the remainder of the class contains method definitions. For the +, -, and * operators, I declare eponymous methods that accept Complex numbers as parameters. Multiplication of complex numbers is less straightforward than addition and subtraction. The overloaded * method in Listing 2 implements the formula:

(x + yi)(u + vi) = (xu - yv) + (xv + yu)i

The toString() method in Listing 2 exemplifies another bit of common ground among the languages: use of expressions rather than statements. In the toString() method, I must supply the plus (+) sign if the imaginary part is positive, but the imaginary part's implicit minus sign suffices otherwise. In Scala, if is an expression rather than a statement, eliminating the need for the Java ternary operator (?:).

In practice, the added +, -, and * methods are indistinguishable from standard operators, as shown in the unit tests in Listing 3:

Listing 3. Exercising Scala complex numbers
class ComplexTest extends FunSuite {
  test("addition") {
    val c1 = new Complex(1, 3)
    val c2 = new Complex(4, 5)
    assert(c1 + c2 === new Complex(1+4, 3+5))

  test("subtraction") {
    val c1 = new Complex(1, 3)
    val c2 = new Complex(4, 5)
    assert(c1 - c2 === new Complex(1-4, 3-5))

  test("multiplication") {
    val c1 = new Complex(1, 3)
    val c2 = new Complex(4, 5)
    assert(c1 * c2 === new Complex(
        c1.real * c2.real - c1.imaginary * c2.imaginary,
        c1.real * c2.imaginary + c1.imaginary * c2.real))

The tests in Listing 3 fail to reveal an interesting inconsistency. I expose and solve that problem momentarily, when I discuss associativity. First, though, a word about overloading in Groovy and Clojure.

Groovy's mappings

Groovy overloads any Java operators by providing mapping methods that you can override. (For example, to override the + operator, you override the plus() method on the Integer class.) I cover Groovy's operator-overloading details, with the same complex-number example, in "Functional design patterns, Part 3," an installment of my Functional thinking series about extensibility in functional languages.

In Groovy, you cannot create new operators (although you can certainly create new methods). Some frameworks (such as the Spock testing framework; see Resources) overload esoteric but existing operators such as >>>. Both Scala and Clojure treat operators and methods more uniformly, although in distinctive ways.

Groovy also introduced several handy new operators, such as ?. — the safe navigation operator, which ensures that none of the callers is null — and the Elvis operator (?:), a shortening of the Java ternary operator that is useful for easily supplying default values. Groovy has no extension methods for its new operators, preventing developers from overloading them. And it is not clear why developers would want to overload them: The typical rationale for operator overloading lies with using prior experience with an operator to make your code more readable. You are unlikely to develop experience with these operators outside of Groovy. Operator overloading becomes dangerous if you use the operators for convenience but harm readability.

Clojure's operators

As in Scala, operators in Clojure are merely methods with symbolic names. Thus, you can trivially create a + method, for example, for your custom type. However, to override operators properly in Clojure, you must understand protocols and a technique for generating a set of methods from a common core. I save that discussion for a later installment.


Operator associativity refers to whether the operator is a method on the left or right side of the equation. Scala uses white space differently from most other languages, in that essentially any Scala method can act as an operator. For example, the expression x + y is really the method invocation x.+(y), as in the Scala REPL (interpreter) session in Listing 4:

Listing 4. White space translation in Scala
scala> val sum1 = x.+(y)
sum1: Int = 22

scala> val sum2 = (12).+(10)
sum2: Int = 22

You can see in Listing 4 that white space translation also works for constants. You can treat all the methods in Scala as operators if you like. For example, the String class has an indexOf() method that returns the index position within the string of the character that is passed as the argument. In Scala, you can call it traditionally through s.indexOf('a') or as an operator — as in s indexOf 'a'. (This particular method is interesting because it has an overloaded version that accepts an extra parameter to specify the index position where the search begins. You can still call it using operator notation, but you must put the parameters in parentheses, as in s indexOf('a', 3)).

Groovy follows the Java associativity conventions, so the rules for a specific operator are defined by the language. Clojure is free of any concerns about associativity; its Lisp syntax does not rely on associativity because all statements are unambiguous.

Because one of Scala's goals is to allow developers to use anything as an operator, it cannot rely on arbitrary associativity rules. How can the language allow ad hoc operators yet still establish rules? Scala solves this problem in an innovative way that enables maximum developer freedom — by using a naming convention for operators. By default, operators in Scala left-associate: The expression resolves to a method call on the left operand, meaning that the expression x + y resolves to x.+(y), for example. However, if the method name ends with :, the operator right-associates. For example, the invocation i +: j translates to j.+:(i).

Associativity explains why the tests in Listing 3 fail to tell the entire story. In the Scala Complex definition in Listing 2, I implement versions of + and - operators that accept both Complex and Int parameter types. This type flexibility allows complex numbers to interoperate with regular integers (which are complex numbers with a zero imaginary part). Listing 5 illustrates interoperability in the unit tests:

Listing 5. Tests for mixed types
test("mixed addition from Complex") {
  val c1 = new Complex(1, 3)
  assert(new Complex(7, 3) == c1 + 6)

test("mixed subtraction from Complex") {
  val c1 = new Complex(10, 3)
  assert(new Complex(5, 3) == c1 - 5)

Both tests in Listing 5 pass with no problems — the Int version of the operator method is started. However, if I try the following test, it fails:

test("mixed subtraction from Int") {
  val c1 = new Complex(10, 3)
  assert(new Complex(15, 3) == 5 + c1)

The subtle difference between the two tests concerns associativity. Remember, Scala calls the method of the left operator in this case, meaning that it is trying to start a method that is defined for Int that "knows" how to handle a complex number.

To solve this problem, I define an implicit cast between Int and Complex. There are several ways to show this conversion, which I cover in more detail in later installments. In this instance, I create a companion object — a place for methods that would be declared static in the Java language— called Complex:

final object Complex {
  implicit def intToComplex(x: Int) = new Complex(x, 0)

This definition includes a single method, accepting an Int and returning it as a Complex. By placing this declaration in the same source file as the Complex class, I enable the implicit conversion by importing this method within my test case through the import nealford.javaNext.complexnumbers.Complex.intToComplex command. When I have the conversion in scope, the test case passes because the test knows how to handle the method invocation that is made through the operator.


Operator precedence (or order of operations) refers to a language's rules for the order in which operations take place in potentially ambiguous situations. Groovy relies on the Java precedence rules for common operators and defines its own rules for its custom operators. Clojure does not have or need precedence rules; because all code is written in fully parenthesized form, the ambiguity inherent in infix notation never appears.

Scala uses the first character of the operator name to determine order of operations, in this precedence hierarchy:

  • All other special characters
  • * / %
  • + -
  • :
  • = !
  • < >
  • &
  • ^
  • |
  • All letters
  • All assignment operators

Operators that start with higher-ranked characters have higher precedence. For example, the expression x *** y ||| z would resolve to (x.***(y)).|||(z). The lone exception to this rule concerns assignment statements, or any operator that ends with an equals sign (=), which automatically have the lowest precedence.


A shared goal of the languages is to ease cumbersome restrictions that affect the Java language. Operator overloading is a great example of how each language approaches this problem. All three languages allow operator overloading, varying in how they implement that power. The subtle nuances of how to handle problems like associativity and precedence show how connected language parts are to one another. One of Clojure's interesting aspects is that its syntax — because every expression is inherently parenthesized — eliminates ambiguity in precedence and associativity.

In the next installment, I explore just how deep the "Everything is an object" philosophy penetrates in the languages.



Get products and technologies



developerWorks: Sign in

Required fields are indicated with an asterisk (*).

Need an IBM ID?
Forgot your IBM ID?

Forgot your password?
Change your password

By clicking Submit, you agree to the developerWorks terms of use.


The first time you sign into developerWorks, a profile is created for you. Information in your profile (your name, country/region, and company name) is displayed to the public and will accompany any content you post, unless you opt to hide your company name. You may update your IBM account at any time.

All information submitted is secure.

Choose your display name

The first time you sign in to developerWorks, a profile is created for you, so you need to choose a display name. Your display name accompanies the content you post on developerWorks.

Please choose a display name between 3-31 characters. Your display name must be unique in the developerWorks community and should not be your email address for privacy reasons.

Required fields are indicated with an asterisk (*).

(Must be between 3 – 31 characters.)

By clicking Submit, you agree to the developerWorks terms of use.


All information submitted is secure.

Dig deeper into Java technology on developerWorks

Zone=Java technology, Open source
ArticleID=860926 Common ground in Groovy, Scala, and Clojure, Part 1