# Hygienic Closures for Scala Function Serialization

| Feedback

In most use cases of Scala closures, what you see is what you get, but there are exceptions where looks can be deceiving and this can have a big impact on closure serialization. Closure serialization is of more than academic interest. Tools like Apache Spark cannot operate without serializing functions over the network. In this post I’ll describe some scenarios where closures include more than what is evident in the code, and then a technique for preventing unwanted inclusions.

To establish a bit of context, consider this simple example that obtains a function and serializes it to disk, and which does behave as expected:

object Demo extends App {
def write[A](obj: A, fname: String) {
import java.io._
new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream(fname)).writeObject(obj)
}

object foo {
val v = 42
// The returned function includes 'v' in its closure
def f() = (x: Int) => v * x
}

// The function 'f' will serialize as expected
val f = foo.f
write(f, "/tmp/demo.f")
}


When this app is compiled and run, it will serialize f to “/tmp/demo.f1”, which of course includes the value of v as part of the closure for f.

$scalac -d /tmp closures.scala$ scala -cp /tmp Demo
$ls /tmp/demo* /tmp/demo.f  Now, imagine you wanted to make a straightforward change, where object foo becomes class foo: object Demo extends App { def write[A](obj: A, fname: String) { import java.io._ new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream(fname)).writeObject(obj) } // foo is a class instead of an object class foo() { val v = 42 // The returned function includes 'v' in its closure, but also a secret surprise def f() = (x: Int) => v * x } // This will throw an exception! val f = new foo().f write(f, "/tmp/demo.f") }  It would be reasonable to expect that this minor variation behaves exactly as the previous one, but instead it throws an exception! $ scalac -d /tmp closures.scala
$scala -cp /tmp Demo java.io.NotSerializableException: Demo$foo


If we look at the exception message, we see that it’s complaining about not knowing how to serialize objects of class foo. But we weren’t including any values of foo in the closure for f, only a particular member ‘v’! What gives? Scala is not very helpful with diagnosing this problem, but when a class member value shows up in a closure that is defined inside the class body, the entire instance, including any and all other member values, is included in the closure. Presumably this is because a class may have any number of instances, and the compiler is including the entire instance in the closure to properly resolve the correct member value.

One straightforward way to fix this is to simply make class foo serializable:

class foo() extends Serializable {
// ...
}


If you make this change to the above code, the example with class foo now works correctly, but it is working by serializing the entire foo instance, not just the value of v.

In many cases, this is not a problem and will work fine. Serializing a few additional members may be inexpensive. In other cases, however, it can be an impractical or impossible option. For example, foo might include other very large members, which will be expensive or outright impossible to serialize:

class foo() extends Serializable {
val v = 42    // easy to serialize
val w = 4.5   // easy to serialize
val data = (1 to 1000000000).toList  // serialization landmine hiding in your closure

// The returned function includes all of 'foo' instance in its closure
def f() = (x: Int) => v * x
}


A variation on the above problem is class members that are small or moderate in size, but serialized many times. In this case, the serialization cost can become intractable via repetition of unwanted inclusions.

Another potential problem is class members that are not serializable, and perhaps not under your control:

class foo() extends Serializable {
import some.class.NotSerializable

val v = 42                      // easy to serialize
val x = new NotSerializable     // I'll hide in your closure and fail to serialize

// The returned function includes all of 'foo' instance in its closure
def f() = (x: Int) => v * x
}


There is a relatively painless way to decouple values from their parent instance, so that only desired values are included in a closure. Passing desired values as parameters to a shim function whose job is to assemble the closure will prevent the parent instance from being pulled into the closure. In the following example, a shim function named closureFunction is defined for this purpose:

object Demo extends App {
def write[A](obj: A, fname: String) {
import java.io._
new ObjectOutputStream(new FileOutputStream(fname)).writeObject(obj)
}

// apply a generator to create a function with safe decoupled closures
def closureFunction[E,D,R](enclosed: E)(gen: E => (D => R)) = gen(enclosed)

class NotSerializable {}

class foo() {
val v1 = 42
val v2 = 73
val n = new NotSerializable

// use shim function to enclose *only* the values of 'v1' and 'v2'
def f() = closureFunction((v1, v2)) { enclosed =>
val (v1, v2) = enclosed
(x: Int) => (v1 + v2) * x   // Desired function, with 'v1' and 'v2' enclosed
}
}

// This will work!
val f = new foo().f
write(f, "/tmp/demo.f")
}


Being aware of the scenarios where parent instances are pulled into closures, and how to keep your closures clean, can save some frustration and wasted time. Happy programming!