--- /dev/null
+// Rust-101, Part 16: Unsafe, Drop (WIP)
+// ===============================
+
+use std::ptr;
+use std::mem;
+use std::marker::PhantomData;
+
+//@ As we saw, the rules Rust imposes can get us pretty far: A surprising amount of programming patterns
+//@ can be written within safe Rust, and, more importantly, library code like iterators or threads can make
+//@ use of the type system to ensure some level of correctness beyond basic memory safety.
+//@
+//@ However, there will still be programs that one cannot write in accordance with the borrow checker. And there
+//@ will be cases where it may be possible to satisfy the compiler, but only at the cost of some run-time overhead,
+//@ as we saw with `RefCell` - overhead which may not be acceptable. In such a situation, it is possible to
+//@ use *unsafe* Rust: That's a part of the language that is *known* to open the gate to invalid pointer access
+//@ and all other sorts of memory safety. It is typically disabled, guarded by the keyword `unsafe`. Of course,
+//@ `unsafe` also means "Here Be Dragons": You are on your own now. Types like `Rc` and `Vec` are implemented
+//@ `using unsafe Rust.
+//@
+//@ ## Unsafe Code
+//@ As an example, let us write a doubly-linked list. Clearly, such a data-structure involves aliasing and mutation:
+//@ Every node in the list is pointed to by its left and right neighbor, but still we will want to modify the nodes
+//@ (either to change the value at that place, or to insert new nodes). We could now try some clever combination of
+//@ `Rc` and `RefCell`, but this would end up being quite annoying - and it would incur some over-head. For a low-level
+//@ data-structure like a doubly-linked list, it makes sense to implement an efficient version *once*, that is unsafe
+//@ internally, but taht can be used without any risk by safe client code.
+
+//@ As usually, we start by defining the types. Everything is parameterized by the type `T` of the data stored in the list.
+// A node of the list consists of the data, and two node pointers for the predecessor and successor.
+struct Node<T> {
+ next: NodePtr<T>,
+ prev: NodePtr<T>,
+ data: T,
+}
+// A node pointer is a *mutable raw point* to a node.
+//@ Raw pointers (`*mut T` and `*const T`) are the Rust equivalent of pointers in C. Unlike borrows, they do not come with
+//@ any guarantees: Raw pointers can be null, or they can point to garbage. They don't have a lifetime.
+type NodePtr<T> = *mut Node<T>;
+
+// The linked list itself stores pointers to the first and the last node. In addition, we tell Rust that this type
+// will own data of type `T`.
+//@ The type `PhantomData<T>` does not actually store anything in memory - it has size zero. However, logically,
+//@ Rust will consider a `T` to be present. In this case, Rust knows that data of type `T` may be dropped
+//@ whenever a `LinkedList<T>` is dropped. The checks involving destructors are pretty subtle, so it's always
+//@ a good idea to provide such extra information. In safe Rust, this can all be done automatically, but here,
+//@ we just have a `*mut Node<T>`, which Rust does not consider as actually owning the data it points to.
+pub struct LinkedList<T> {
+ first: NodePtr<T>,
+ last: NodePtr<T>,
+ _marker: PhantomData<T>,
+}
+
+//@ Before we get to the actual linked-list methods, we write two short helper functions converting between
+//@ mutable raw pointers, and owned pointers (aka `Box`). Both employ `mem::transmute`, which is Rust's
+//@ `reinterpret_cast`: It can convert anything to anything, by just re-interpreting the bytes. Clearly,
+//@ that's an unsafe operation.
+
+//@ We declare `raw_into_box` to be an `unsafe` function, telling Rust that calling this function is not generally safe.
+//@ The caller will have to ensure that `r` is a valid pointer, and that nobody else has a pointer to this data.
+unsafe fn raw_into_box<T>(r: *mut T) -> Box<T> {
+ mem::transmute(r)
+}
+//@ The case is slightly different for `box_into_raw`: Converting a `Box` to a raw pointer is always safe. I just drops some
+//@ information. Hence we keep the function itself safe, and use an *unsafe block* within the function. This is an (unchecked)
+//@ promise to the Rust compiler, saying that even though the code inside that block *could* go wrong, we actually know that
+//@ it will not.
+fn box_into_raw<T>(b: Box<T>) -> *mut T {
+ unsafe { mem::transmute(b) }
+}
+
+impl<T> LinkedList<T> {
+ // A new linked list just contains null pointers. `PhantomData` is how we construct any `PhantomData<T>`.
+ pub fn new() -> Self {
+ LinkedList { first: ptr::null_mut(), last: ptr::null_mut(), _marker: PhantomData }
+ }
+
+ // Add a new node to the end of the list.
+ pub fn push_back(&mut self, t: T) {
+ // Create the new node, and make it a raw pointer.
+ //@ Calling `box_into_raw` gives up ownership of the box, which is crucial: We don't want the
+ //@ memory that it points to to be deallocated!
+ let new = Box::new( Node { data: t, next: ptr::null_mut(), prev: self.last } );
+ let new = box_into_raw(new);
+ // Update other points to this node.
+ if self.last.is_null() {
+ debug_assert!(self.first.is_null());
+ // The list is currently empty, so we have to update the head pointer.
+ self.first = new; /*@*/
+ } else {
+ debug_assert!(!self.first.is_null());
+ // We have to update the `next` pointer of the tail node.
+ //@ Since Rust does not know that a raw pointer actually to anything, dereferencing such a pointer is
+ //@ an unsafe operation. So this unsafe block promises that the pointer will actually be valid.
+ unsafe { (*self.last).next = new; } /*@*/
+ }
+ // Make this the last node.
+ self.last = new;
+ }
+
+ // **Exercise 16.1**: Add some more operations to `LinkedList`: `pop_back`, `push_front` and `pop_front`.
+ // Add testcases for `push_back` and all of your functions. The `pop` functions should take `&mut self`
+ // and return `Option<T>`.
+
+ // Of course, we will also want to provide an iterator.
+ //@ This function just creates an instance of `IterMut`, the iterator type which does the actual work.
+ pub fn iter_mut(&self) -> IterMut<T> {
+ IterMut { next: self.first, _marker: PhantomData }
+ }
+}
+
+//@ What does the iterator need to store? Strictly speaking, all it needs is the pointer to the next node
+//@ that it is going to visit. However, how do we make sure that this pointer remains valid? We have to
+//@ get this right ourselves, as we left the safe realms of borrowing and ownership. Remember that the
+//@ key ingredient for iterator safety was to tie the lifetime of the iterator to the lifetime of the
+//@ borrow used for `iter_mut`. We will thus give `IterMut` two parameters: A type parameter specifying
+//@ the type of the data, and a lifetime parameter specifying for how long the list was borrowed to the
+//@ iterator.
+//@
+//@ For Rust to accept the type, we have to add two more annotations. First of all, we have to ensure that
+//@ the data in the list lives at least as long as the iterator: If you drop the `T: 'a`, Rust will tell
+//@ you to add it back. And secondly, Rust will complain if `'a` is not actually used in the struct.
+//@ It doesn't know what it is supposed to do with that lifetime. So we use `PhantomData` again to tell
+//@ it that in terms of ownership, this type actually (mutably) borrows a linked list. This has no
+//@ operational effect, but it means that Rust can deduce the intent we had when adding that
+//@ seemingly useless lifetime parameter.
+pub struct IterMut<'a, T> where T: 'a {
+ next: NodePtr<T>,
+ _marker: PhantomData<&'a mut LinkedList<T>>,
+}
+
+//@ When implementing `Iterator` for `IterMut`, the fact that we have the lifetime `'a` around immediately
+//@ pays of: We would not even be able to write down the type `Item` without that lifetime.
+impl<'a, T> Iterator for IterMut<'a, T> {
+ type Item = &'a mut T;
+
+ fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
+ // The actual iteration is straight-forward: Once we reached a null pointer, we are done.
+ if self.next.is_null() {
+ None
+ } else {
+ // Otherwise, we can convert the next pointer to a borrow, get a borrow to the data
+ // and update the iterator.
+ let next = unsafe { &mut *self.next };
+ let ret = &mut next.data;
+ self.next = next.next;
+ Some(ret)
+ }
+ }
+}
+
+//@ In `next` above, we made crucial use of the assumption that `self.next` is either null or a valid pointer.
+//@ This only works because if someone tries to delete elements from a list during iteration, we know that the borrow checker
+//@ will catch them: If they call `next`, the lifetime `'a` we artificially added to the iterator has to still be
+//@ active, which means the mutable borrow passed to `iter_mut` is still active, which means nobody can delete
+//@ anything from the list. In other words, we make use of the expressive type system of Rust, decorating
+//@ our own unsafe implementation with just enough information so that Rust can check *uses* of the linked-list.
+//@ If the type system were weaker, we could not write a linked-list like the above with a safe interface!
+
+// **Exercise 16.2**: Add a method `iter` and a type `Iter` providing iteration for shared borrows.
+// Add testcases for both kinds of iterators.
+
+// ## `Drop`
+//@ The linked list we wrote is already working quite nicely, but there is one problem: When the list is removed,
+//@ nobody bothers to deallocate the remaining nodes. Even worse, if `T` itself has a destructor that needs to
+//@ clean up, it is not called for the element remaining in the list. We need to take care of that ourselves.
+//@
+//@ In Rust, adding a destructor for a type is done by implementing the `Drop` trait. This is a very special trait.
+//@ It can only be implemented for *nominal types*, i.e., you cannot implement `Drop` for `&mut T`. You also cannot
+//@ restrict the type and lifetime parameters further - the `Drop` implementation has to apply to *all* instances
+//@ of `LinkedList`.
+impl<T> Drop for LinkedList<T> {
+ // The destructor itself is a method which takes `self` in mutably borrowed form. It cannot own `self`, because then
+ // the destructor of `self` would be called at the end pf the function, resulting in endless recursion...
+ fn drop(&mut self) {
+ let mut cur_ptr = self.first;
+ while !cur_ptr.is_null() {
+ // In the destructor, we just iterate over the entire list, successively obtaining ownership
+ // (`Box`) of every node. When the box is dropped, it will call the destructor on `data` if
+ // necessary, and subsequently free the node on the heap.
+ //@ We call `drop` explicitly here just for documentation purposes.
+ let cur = unsafe { raw_into_box(cur_ptr) };
+ cur_ptr = cur.next;
+ drop(cur);
+ }
+ }
+}
+
+//@ ## The End
+//@ Congratulations! You complete Rust-101. This was the last example of the last part. I hope you enjoyed it.
+//@ If you have feedback, please head to the [Rust-101](https://www.ralfj.de/projects/rust-101/) website
+//@ and let me know how you liked it. The entire course is open-source (under CC-BY-SA 4.0), and contributions are welcome!
+//@
+//@ The [index](main.html) contains some more links to additional resources you may find useful. With that, there's
+//@ only one thing left to say: Happy Rust Hacking!
+
+//@ [index](main.html) | [previous](part15.html)
projects / rust-101.git / blobdiff