Contravariance usage in Scala

Question

As per the definition of contravariance (super class instances will be accepted), my last statement in the below code snippet, should be accepted; but it is thrown with type error. Can you please correct my understanding.

  class A
  class B extends A
  class C extends B
  
  abstract class Box[-T] {
     def set(x : T) :Unit
  }
  
  val x = new Box[B] {
    def set(b:B) = Console println "B"
  }
  
  val y  = new Box[A] {
    def set(a:A) = Console println "A"
  }
  
  val z  = new Box[C] {
    def set(c:C) = Console println "C"
  }  

  x.set(new A)   <-- Type error

But x.set(new C) is fine, So even though "contravariant parameters are accepted as method parameters" is in fact. are covariant parameters actually.

Answer 1

You are confusing how contravariance works. x is a Box[B] as such, set accepts values of type B (or any subtype of B because that is what Liskvo says) .

However, Box[A] is a subtype of a Box[B] . So you could have passed y where x is expected. Because a Box that can store any A can store a B .
But, a Box that can store only B s can not store and arbitrary A .

Answer 2

It looks like this not how it would work and that's from a conceptual stand point: a B is an A but not the other way around.

As indicated in thescala doc for variances , contravariant type parameters allow to pass a "super-type" instead of the "sub-type", but this applies to what is used within the body (eg If the "super-type" already has defined what's used) otherwise I guess it just considers the type and we're back to what I explained before.