X-Git-Url: https://git.ralfj.de/rust-101.git/blobdiff_plain/a2eeb1b93e8f52b2119fb11d56f5ffc764ac747b..a0edb0ae866081958e5d6e2ec5a3579d2bb01085:/src/part16.rs

diff --git a/src/part16.rs b/src/part16.rs
index a613430..efa48a5 100644
--- a/src/part16.rs
+++ b/src/part16.rs
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
-// Rust-101, Part 16: Unsafe, Drop (WIP)
-// ===============================
+// Rust-101, Part 16: Unsafe Rust, Drop
+// ====================================
 
 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
+//@ As we saw, the rules Rust imposes to ensure memory safety can get us pretty far. A large 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.
 //@ 
@@ -13,17 +13,16 @@ use std::marker::PhantomData;
 //@ 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.
+//@ and all other sorts of memory safety. Of course, `unsafe` also means "Here Be Dragons": You are on your own now. <br/>
+//@ The goal in these cases is to confine unsafety to the local module. Types like `Rc` and `Vec` are implemented
+//@ using unsafe Rust, but *using* them as we did is (believed to be) perfectly safe.
 //@ 
 //@ ## 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.
+//@ Every node in the list is pointed to by its left and right neighbor, but still we will want to modify the 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 overhead. 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 that 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.
@@ -32,38 +31,43 @@ struct Node<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.
+// A node pointer is a *mutable raw pointer* to a node.
+//@ Raw pointers (`*mut T` and `*const T`) are the Rust equivalent of pointers in C. Unlike references, they do not come with
+//@ any guarantees: Raw pointers can be null, or they can point to garbage. They don't have a lifetime, either.
 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.
+//@ whenever a `LinkedList<T>` is dropped. Dropping has a lot of subtle checks to it, making sure that things can't go
+//@ wrong. For this to work, Rust needs to know which types could potentially be dropped. In safe Rust, this can all be inferred
+//@ automatically, but here, we just have a `*mut Node<T>`, and we need to tell Rust that we actually own such data and will drop it.
+//@ (For more of the glory details, see [this RFC](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/text/0769-sound-generic-drop.md).)
 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.
+//@ Before we get to the actual linked-list methods, we write two short helper functions converting between mutable raw pointers,
+//@ and boxed data. Both employ `mem::transmute`, which can convert anything to anything, by just re-interpreting the bytes.
+//@ Clearly, that's an unsafe operation and must only be used with great care - or even better, not at all. Seriously.
+//@ If at all possible, you should never use `transmute`. <br/>
+//@ We are making the assumption here that a `Box` and a raw pointer have the same representation in memory. In the future,
+//@ Rust will [provide](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/alloc/boxed/struct.Box.html#method.from_raw) such [operations](https://doc.rust-lang.org/beta/alloc/boxed/struct.Box.html#method.into_raw) in the standard library, but the exact API is still being fleshed out.
 
 //@ 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.
+//@ This grants us the unsafe powers for the body of the function: We can dereference raw pointers, and - most importantly - we
+//@ can call unsafe functions. (The other unsafe powers won't be relevant here. Go read [The Rustonomicon](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/nomicon/)
+//@ if you want to learn all about this, but be warned - That Way Lies Madness.) <br/>
+//@ Here, 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.
+//@ The case is slightly different for `box_into_raw`: Converting a `Box` to a raw pointer is always safe. It 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 a safe invocation of `box_into_raw` cannot go wrong. We also have the unsafe powers in the unsafe block.
 fn box_into_raw<T>(b: Box<T>) -> *mut T {
     unsafe { mem::transmute(b) }
 }
@@ -74,14 +78,13 @@ impl<T> LinkedList<T> {
         LinkedList { first: ptr::null_mut(), last: ptr::null_mut(), _marker: PhantomData }
     }
 
-    // Add a new node to the end of the list.
+    // This function adds 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!
+        //@ 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.
+        // Update other pointers 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.
@@ -89,7 +92,7 @@ impl<T> LinkedList<T> {
         } 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
+            //@ Since Rust does not know that a raw pointer actually points 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; }                     /*@*/
         }
@@ -101,9 +104,9 @@ impl<T> LinkedList<T> {
     // 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.
+    // Next, we are going 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> {
+    pub fn iter_mut(&mut self) -> IterMut<T> {
         IterMut { next: self.first, _marker: PhantomData  }
     }
 }
@@ -112,15 +115,15 @@ impl<T> LinkedList<T> {
 //@ 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
+//@ reference 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
+//@ it that in terms of ownership, this type actually (uniquely) 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 {
@@ -136,14 +139,14 @@ impl<'a, T> Iterator for IterMut<'a, 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
+            None
         } else {
-            // Otherwise, we can convert the next pointer to a borrow, get a borrow to the data
+            // Otherwise, we can convert the next pointer to a reference, get a reference to the data
             // and update the iterator.
             let next = unsafe { &mut *self.next };
             let ret = &mut next.data;
-            self.next = next.next;
-            Some(ret)
+            self.next = next.next;                                  /*@*/
+            Some(ret)                                               /*@*/
         }
     }
 }
@@ -151,26 +154,26 @@ impl<'a, T> Iterator for IterMut<'a, T> {
 //@ 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
+//@ active, which means the mutable reference 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.
+// **Exercise 16.2**: Add a method `iter` and a type `Iter` providing iteration for shared references.
 // 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,
+//@ The linked list we wrote is already working quite nicely, but there is one problem: When the list is dropped,
 //@ 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
+//@ restrict the type and lifetime parameters further than the type does - 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...
+    // the destructor of `self` would be called at the end of the function, resulting in endless recursion.
     fn drop(&mut self) {
         let mut cur_ptr = self.first;
         while !cur_ptr.is_null() {
@@ -185,12 +188,13 @@ impl<T> Drop for LinkedList<T> {
     }
 }
 
-//@ ## 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 End
+//@ Congratulations! You completed Rust-101. This was the last part of the course. I hope you enjoyed it.
+//@ If you have feedback or want to contribute yourself, please head to the [Rust-101](https://www.ralfj.de/projects/rust-101/) website
+//@ fur further information. The entire course is open-source (under [CC-BY-SA 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/)).
 //@ 
-//@ 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!
+//@ If you want to do more, the examples you saw in this course provide lots of playground for coming up with your own little
+//@ extensions here and there. 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)
+//@ [index](main.html) | [previous](part15.html) | [raw source](https://www.ralfj.de/git/rust-101.git/blob_plain/HEAD:/workspace/src/part16.rs) | next