From: Nicola 'tekNico' Larosa Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2018 18:29:45 +0000 (+0100) Subject: part12.rs lines shortened X-Git-Url: https://git.ralfj.de/rust-101.git/commitdiff_plain/4bd3f6148195f83d13a11f3923bd61f59d6bf285?hp=-c part12.rs lines shortened --- 4bd3f6148195f83d13a11f3923bd61f59d6bf285 diff --git a/src/part12.rs b/src/part12.rs index c2331ea..6803aca 100644 --- a/src/part12.rs +++ b/src/part12.rs @@ -4,22 +4,26 @@ use std::rc::Rc; use std::cell::{Cell, RefCell}; -//@ Our generic callback mechanism is already working quite nicely. However, there's one point we may want to fix: -//@ `Callbacks` does not implement `Clone`. The problem is that closures (or rather, their environment) can never be cloned. +//@ Our generic callback mechanism is already working quite nicely. However, there's one point we +//@ may want to fix: `Callbacks` does not implement `Clone`. The problem is that closures (or +//@ rather, their environment) can never be cloned. //@ (There's not even an automatic derivation happening for the cases where it would be possible.) //@ This restriction propagates up to `Callbacks` itself. What could we do about this? //@ ## `Rc` -//@ The solution is to find some way of cloning `Callbacks` without cloning the environments. This can be achieved with -//@ `Rc`, a *reference-counted* pointer. This is is another example of a smart pointer. You can `clone` an `Rc` as often -//@ as you want, that doesn't affect the data it contains. It only creates more references to the same data. Once all the -//@ references are gone, the data is deleted. + +//@ The solution is to find some way of cloning `Callbacks` without cloning the environments. This +//@ can be achieved with `Rc`, a *reference-counted* pointer. This is is another example of a +//@ smart pointer. You can `clone` an `Rc` as often as you want, that doesn't affect the data it +//@ contains. It only creates more references to the same data. Once all the references are gone, +//@ the data is deleted. //@ //@ Wait a moment, you may say here. Multiple references to the same data? That's aliasing! Indeed: //@ Once data is stored in an `Rc`, it is read-only and you can only ever get a shared reference to the data again. -//@ Because of this read-only restriction, we cannot use `FnMut` here: We'd be unable to call the function with a mutable reference -//@ to it's environment! So we have to go with `Fn`. We wrap that in an `Rc`, and then Rust happily derives `Clone` for us. +//@ Because of this read-only restriction, we cannot use `FnMut` here: We'd be unable to call the +//@ function with a mutable reference to it's environment! So we have to go with `Fn`. We wrap that +//@ in an `Rc`, and then Rust happily derives `Clone` for us. #[derive(Clone)] struct Callbacks { callbacks: Vec>, @@ -55,17 +59,22 @@ pub fn main() { } // ## Interior Mutability -//@ Of course, the counting example from last time does not work anymore: It needs to mutate the environment, which a `Fn` -//@ cannot do. The strict borrowing Rules of Rust are getting into our way. However, when it comes to mutating a mere number -//@ (`usize`), there's not really any chance of problems coming up. Everybody can read and write that variable just as they want. -//@ So it would be rather sad if we were not able to write this program. Lucky enough, Rust's standard library provides a -//@ solution in the form of `Cell`. This type represents a memory cell of some type `T`, providing the two basic operations -//@ `get` and `set`. `get` returns a *copy* of the content of the cell, so all this works only if `T` is `Copy`. -//@ `set`, which overrides the content, only needs a *shared reference* to the cell. The phenomenon of a type that permits mutation through -//@ shared references (i.e., mutation despite the possibility of aliasing) is called *interior mutability*. You can think -//@ of `set` changing only the *contents* of the cell, not its *identity*. In contrast, the kind of mutation we saw so far was -//@ about replacing one piece of data by something else of the same type. This is called *inherited mutability*.
-//@ Notice that it is impossible to *borrow* the contents of the cell, and that is actually the key to why this is safe. +//@ Of course, the counting example from last time does not work anymore: It needs to mutate the +//@ environment, which a `Fn` cannot do. The strict borrowing Rules of Rust are getting into our +//@ way. However, when it comes to mutating a mere number (`usize`), there's not really any chance +//@ of problems coming up. Everybody can read and write that variable just as they want. +//@ So it would be rather sad if we were not able to write this program. Lucky enough, Rust's +//@ standard library provides a solution in the form of `Cell`. This type represents a memory +//@ cell of some type `T`, providing the two basic operations `get` and `set`. `get` returns a +//@ *copy* of the content of the cell, so all this works only if `T` is `Copy`. +//@ `set`, which overrides the content, only needs a *shared reference* to the cell. The phenomenon +//@ of a type that permits mutation through shared references (i.e., mutation despite the +//@ possibility of aliasing) is called *interior mutability*. You can think of `set` changing only +//@ the *contents* of the cell, not its *identity*. In contrast, the kind of mutation we saw so far +//@ was about replacing one piece of data by something else of the same type. This is called +//@ *inherited mutability*.
+//@ Notice that it is impossible to *borrow* the contents of the cell, and that is actually the key +//@ to why this is safe. // So, let us put our counter in a `Cell`, and replicate the example from the previous part. fn demo_cell(c: &mut Callbacks) { @@ -73,9 +82,10 @@ fn demo_cell(c: &mut Callbacks) { let count = Cell::new(0); // Again, we have to move ownership of the `count` into the environment closure. c.register(move |val| { - // In here, all we have is a shared reference of our environment. But that's good enough for the `get` and `set` of the cell! - //@ At run-time, the `Cell` will be almost entirely compiled away, so this becomes pretty much equivalent to the version - //@ we wrote in the previous part. + // In here, all we have is a shared reference of our environment. But that's good enough + // for the `get` and `set` of the cell! + //@ At run-time, the `Cell` will be almost entirely compiled away, so this becomes + //@ pretty much equivalent to the version we wrote in the previous part. let new_count = count.get()+1; count.set(new_count); println!("Callback 2: {} ({}. time)", val, new_count); @@ -85,26 +95,31 @@ fn demo_cell(c: &mut Callbacks) { c.call(2); c.clone().call(3); } -//@ It is worth mentioning that `Rc` itself also has to make use of interior mutability: When you `clone` an `Rc`, all it has available -//@ is a shared reference. However, it has to increment the reference count! Internally, `Rc` uses `Cell` for the count, such that it -//@ can be updated during `clone`. +//@ It is worth mentioning that `Rc` itself also has to make use of interior mutability: When you +//@ `clone` an `Rc`, all it has available is a shared reference. However, it has to increment the +//@ reference count! Internally, `Rc` uses `Cell` for the count, such that it can be updated during +//@ `clone`. //@ -//@ Putting it all together, the story around mutation and ownership through references looks as follows: There are *unique* references, -//@ which - because of their exclusivity - are always safe to mutate through. And there are *shared* references, where the compiler cannot -//@ generally promise that mutation is safe. However, if extra circumstances guarantee that mutation *is* safe, then it can happen even -//@ through a shared reference - as we saw with `Cell`. +//@ Putting it all together, the story around mutation and ownership through references looks as +//@ follows: There are *unique* references, which - because of their exclusivity - are always safe +//@ to mutate through. And there are *shared* references, where the compiler cannot generally +//@ promise that mutation is safe. However, if extra circumstances guarantee that mutation *is* +//@ safe, then it can happen even through a shared reference - as we saw with `Cell`. // ## `RefCell` -//@ As the next step in the evolution of `Callbacks`, we could try to solve this problem of mutability once and for all, by adding `Cell` -//@ to `Callbacks` such that clients don't have to worry about this. However, that won't end up working: Remember that `Cell` only works -//@ with types that are `Copy`, which the environment of a closure will never be. We need a variant of `Cell` that allows borrowing its -//@ contents, such that we can provide a `FnMut` with its environment. But if `Cell` would allow that, we could write down all those -//@ crashing C++ programs that we wanted to get rid of. +//@ As the next step in the evolution of `Callbacks`, we could try to solve this problem of +//@ mutability once and for all, by adding `Cell` to `Callbacks` such that clients don't have to +//@ worry about this. However, that won't end up working: Remember that `Cell` only works with +//@ types that are `Copy`, which the environment of a closure will never be. We need a variant of +//@ `Cell` that allows borrowing its contents, such that we can provide a `FnMut` with its +//@ environment. But if `Cell` would allow that, we could write down all those crashing C++ +//@ programs that we wanted to get rid of. //@ -//@ This is the point where our program got too complex for Rust to guarantee at compile-time that nothing bad will happen. Since we don't -//@ want to give up the safety guarantee, we are going to need some code that actually checks at run-time that the borrowing rules -//@ are not violated. Such a check is provided by `RefCell`: Unlike `Cell`, this lets us borrow the contents, and it works for -//@ non-`Copy` `T`. But, as we will see, it incurs some run-time overhead. +//@ This is the point where our program got too complex for Rust to guarantee at compile-time that +//@ nothing bad will happen. Since we don't want to give up the safety guarantee, we are going to +//@ need some code that actually checks at run-time that the borrowing rules are not violated. Such +//@ a check is provided by `RefCell`: Unlike `Cell`, this lets us borrow the contents, and it +//@ works for non-`Copy` `T`. But, as we will see, it incurs some run-time overhead. // Our final version of `Callbacks` puts the closure environment into a `RefCell`. #[derive(Clone)] @@ -124,24 +139,34 @@ impl CallbacksMut { pub fn call(&mut self, val: i32) { for callback in self.callbacks.iter() { - // We have to *explicitly* borrow the contents of a `RefCell` by calling `borrow` or `borrow_mut`. - //@ At run-time, the cell will keep track of the number of outstanding shared and mutable references, - //@ and panic if the rules are violated.
- //@ For this check to be performed, `closure` is a *guard*: Rather than a normal reference, `borrow_mut` returns - //@ a smart pointer ([`RefMut`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/stable/std/cell/struct.RefMut.html), in this case) that waits until is goes out of scope, and then - //@ appropriately updates the number of active references. + // We have to *explicitly* borrow the contents of a `RefCell` by calling `borrow` or + // `borrow_mut`. + //@ At run-time, the cell will keep track of the number of outstanding shared and + //@ mutable references, and panic if the rules are violated.
+ + //@ For this check to be performed, `closure` is a *guard*: Rather than a normal + //@ reference, `borrow_mut` returns a smart pointer ([`RefMut`](https://doc.rust- + //@ lang.org/stable/std/cell/struct.RefMut.html), in this case) that waits until is + //@ goes out of scope, and then appropriately updates the number of active references. //@ - //@ Since `call` is the only place that borrows the environments of the closures, we should expect that - //@ the check will always succeed, as is actually entirely useless. However, this is not actually true. Several different `CallbacksMut` could share - //@ a callback (as they were created with `clone`), and calling one callback here could trigger calling - //@ all callbacks of the other `CallbacksMut`, which would end up calling the initial callback again. This issue of functions accidentally recursively calling - //@ themselves is called *reentrancy*, and it can lead to subtle bugs. Here, it would mean that the closure runs twice, each time thinking it has a - //@ unique, mutable reference to its environment - so it may end up dereferencing a dangling pointer. Ouch! Lucky enough, - //@ Rust detects this at run-time and panics once we try to borrow the same environment again. I hope this also makes it - //@ clear that there's absolutely no hope of Rust performing these checks statically, at compile-time: It would have to detect reentrancy! + //@ Since `call` is the only place that borrows the environments of the closures, we + //@ should expect that the check will always succeed, as is actually entirely useless. + //@ However, this is not actually true. Several different `CallbacksMut` could share a + //@ callback (as they were created with `clone`), and calling one callback here could + //@ trigger calling all callbacks of the other `CallbacksMut`, which would end up + //@ calling the initial callback again. + //@ This issue of functions accidentally recursively calling themselves is called + //@ *reentrancy*, and it can lead to subtle bugs. Here, it would mean that the closure + //@ runs twice, each time thinking it has a unique, mutable reference to its + //@ environment - so it may end up dereferencing a dangling pointer. Ouch! + //@ Lucky enough, Rust detects this at run-time and panics once we try to borrow the + //@ same environment again. I hope this also makes it clear that there's absolutely no + //@ hope of Rust performing these checks statically, at compile-time: It would have to + //@ detect reentrancy! let mut closure = callback.borrow_mut(); - // Unfortunately, Rust's auto-dereference of pointers is not clever enough here. We thus have to explicitly - // dereference the smart pointer and obtain a mutable reference to the content. + // Unfortunately, Rust's auto-dereference of pointers is not clever enough here. We + // thus have to explicitly dereference the smart pointer and obtain a mutable reference + // to the content. (&mut *closure)(val); } } @@ -163,7 +188,9 @@ fn demo_mut(c: &mut CallbacksMut) { c.call(1); c.clone().call(2); } -// **Exercise 12.1**: Write some piece of code using only the available, public interface of `CallbacksMut` such that a reentrant call to a closure -// is happening, and the program panics because the `RefCell` refuses to hand out a second mutable borrow of the closure's environment. +// **Exercise 12.1**: Write some piece of code using only the available, public interface of +// `CallbacksMut` such that a reentrant call to a closure is happening, and the program panics +// because the `RefCell` refuses to hand out a second mutable borrow of the closure's environment. -//@ [index](main.html) | [previous](part11.html) | [raw source](workspace/src/part12.rs) | [next](part13.html) +//@ [index](main.html) | [previous](part11.html) | [raw source](workspace/src/part12.rs) | +//@ [next](part13.html)