ammonite | Play with your favorite language in GNU TeXmacs | Functional Programming library

You should basically just add the required implicit evidence to your mapFun method:

As Renaud Tarnec mentioned your rules overlap each other. As explained in the Firestore documentation when multiple rules match a document the request is allowed if any of them is truthy. Actually the rules applied to a document in the sessions collection are:

As far as I know there is no automated feature for this.

I would solve it by using the circe cursor api directly:

Have you enabled macro annotations? Scala 2.13 require flag that you can enable in Ammonite with:

If your file is not present inside the docker image, then you need to mount a folder so that your application iside the container can access a folder on your host machine.

You can find useful information in the official documentation https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/commandline/run/

This is because of binary imcompatibilities.

https://github.com/json4s/json4s/issues/316

Spark 2.3.0 depends on json4s-jackson_2.11-3.2.11 but you can try to use incompatible versions of json4s-native.

So remove json4s from --jars, import org.json4s.jackson.JsonMethods._ instead of org.json4s.native.JsonMethods._ and remove the 3rd parameter of parse (in json4s 3.2.11 there is no parameter useBigIntForLong).

Then

The thing is primarily not in the difference of context bound vs. implicit parameter (there shouldn't be any difference (*)), the thing is that implicitly can break type of implicit found

https://typelevel.org/blog/2014/01/18/implicitly_existential.html

If you fix summon2 using custom materializer this will work as expected

map on Nested works if there is an instance of Functor for both types.
And the Functor of Future requires and implicit ExecutionContext in scope, since all methods in Future requires it.

So if you add a line like this (or any other form of putting an implicit ec in scope):

Does the expression >: Char with Int <: AnyVal mean - Any type (_1) that is a supertype of Char with Int but a subtype of AnyVal?

Yes, this is correct.

are we defining a new Char class with the 'traits' of Int

We are not defining anything. Are you define a 'class' when you write 'x: Int => String' ? No, it's just type expression. This is a syntax that allows you to express a type. With keyword 'with' you construct a type that is a subtype of Char and subtype of Int. This expression can be used as union type encoding (https://stackoverflow.com/a/6883076/14044371). A union type is a type that combines few types in a single type with logical "Or". It also called "type disjunction". Intuitively you can try to understand this by imagining examples: