Due to a performance profiling hotspot detailed here, I implemented my own BitSet using Java's BitSet. This is intended to replace the Enumeration.ValueSet. However, it's a bit awkward to use, primarily due to my likely misunderstanding of the relationships between the Enumeration class, Enumeration type and concrete Enumeration object.

In my enumeration objects, I have to have code like this:

type BitSet = alder.BitSet[this.type]
val empty = alder.BitSet[this.type]()

Elsewhere, I need to do things like this:


For mkString I need to actually pass in the enumeration object itself. Is there any way to make this entire edifice a little more user-friendly?

package alder

import scala.language.implicitConversions

class BitSet[E <: Enumeration](val bits: java.util.BitSet) {

  def isEmpty: Boolean = bits.isEmpty

  def nonEmpty: Boolean = !isEmpty

  override def hashCode = bits.hashCode

  override def equals(o: Any) = o match {
    case that: BitSet[E] => this.bits equals that.bits
    case _ => false

  def union(that: BitSet[E]): BitSet[E] = {
    var newBits = bits
    new BitSet[E](newBits)

  def |(that: BitSet[E]): BitSet[E] = union(that)

  def |(v: E#Value): BitSet[E] = union(BitSet(v))

  def intersection(that: BitSet[E]): BitSet[E] = {
    var newBits = bits
    new BitSet(newBits)

  def &(that: BitSet[E]): BitSet[E] = intersection(that)

  def &(v: E#Value): BitSet[E] = intersection(BitSet(v))

  def contains(v: E#Value): Boolean = bits.get(v.id)

  def containsAll(that: BitSet[E]): Boolean = intersection(that) == that

  def containsAny(that: BitSet[E]): Boolean = intersection(that).nonEmpty

  def toBitMask(): Array[Long] = bits.toLongArray

  def mkString(e: E, sep: String): String =
    val vs = e.ValueSet.fromBitMask(toBitMask())


object BitSet {

  def apply[E <: Enumeration](): BitSet[E] = new BitSet[E](new java.util.BitSet)

  def apply[E <: Enumeration](vs: E#Value*): BitSet[E] = {
    var bits = new java.util.BitSet
    for (v <- vs) {
    new BitSet[E](bits)

  def fromBitMask[E <: Enumeration](mask: Array[Long]): BitSet[E] =
    new BitSet[E](java.util.BitSet.valueOf(mask))


After studying your code for a good long while, I realized that the reason you haven't gotten an answer is that there isn't really much to say about your code. Well done!

I would recommend adding some thorough ScalaDoc though. It has been my experience that Scala library developers have far too much faith in the ability of library users to magically understand what they really meant. Examples are wonderful things.

| improve this answer | |
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks, it all still seems pretty awkward to me though... \$\endgroup\$ – experquisite Jul 2 '15 at 18:36

In union(), you wrote new Bitset[E](newBits), but in intersection(), you wrote new BitSet(newBits). Even if they work the same, consistency would be good.

You have functions like union and redundant symbolic operators like |. I suggest that a.union(b) should mutate a, whereas a | b should return a new BitSet.

There are a few more operations that would be necessary for a useful bitset, such as not (a.k.a flip) and xor. It would also be nice to be able to test whether a particular bit is set without having to call toBitMask(). Compare your wrapper against java.util.BitSet to see what is missing.

| improve this answer | |

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.