nordic-dev.net/rust
nordic-dev.net/rust
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust.git synced 2024-11-25 08:13:41 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

auto merge of #18613 : steveklabnik/rust/ownership_guide, r=huonw

Browse Source 
This is a work in progress, but this should get *extensive* review, so I'm putting it up early and often.

This is the start of a draft of the new 'ownership guide,' which explains ownership, borrowing, etc. I'm feeling better about this framing than last time's, but we'll see.
This commit is contained in:
bors 2014-12-04 04:52:37 +00:00
commit 3c89031e1f
8 changed files with 463 additions and 574 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

2
configure vendored
View File

@ -1044,7 +1044,7 @@ do
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-ffi
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-runtime
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-macros
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-lifetimes
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-ownership
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-pointers
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-container
make_dir $h/test/doc-guide-tasks

2
mk/docs.mk
View File

@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
# L10N_LANGS are the languages for which the docs have been
# translated.
######################################################################
DOCS := index intro tutorial guide guide-ffi guide-macros guide-lifetimes \
DOCS := index intro tutorial guide guide-ffi guide-macros guide-ownership \
guide-tasks guide-container guide-pointers guide-testing \
guide-plugin guide-crates complement-bugreport guide-error-handling \
complement-lang-faq complement-design-faq complement-project-faq \

565
src/doc/guide-lifetimes.md
View File

@ -1,565 +0,0 @@
% The Rust References and Lifetimes Guide
# Introduction
References are one of the more flexible and powerful tools available in
Rust. They can point anywhere: into the heap, stack, and even into the
interior of another data structure. A reference is as flexible as a C pointer
or C++ reference.
Unlike C and C++ compilers, the Rust compiler includes special static
checks that ensure that programs use references safely.
Despite their complete safety, a reference's representation at runtime
is the same as that of an ordinary pointer in a C program. They introduce zero
overhead. The compiler does all safety checks at compile time.
Although references have rather elaborate theoretical underpinnings
(e.g. region pointers), the core concepts will be familiar to anyone
who has worked with C or C++. The best way to explain how they are
used—and their limitations—is probably just to work through several examples.
# By example
References, sometimes known as *borrowed pointers*, are only valid for
a limited duration. References never claim any kind of ownership
over the data that they point to. Instead, they are used for cases
where you would like to use data for a short time.
Consider a simple struct type `Point`:
~~~
struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
~~~
We can use this simple definition to allocate points in many different ways. For
example, in this code, each of these local variables contains a point,
but allocated in a different place:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
let on_the_stack : Point = Point {x: 3.0, y: 4.0};
let on_the_heap : Box<Point> = box Point {x: 7.0, y: 9.0};
~~~
Suppose we wanted to write a procedure that computed the distance between any
two points, no matter where they were stored. One option is to define a function
that takes two arguments of type `Point`—that is, it takes the points by value.
But if we define it this way, calling the function will cause the points to be
copied. For points, this is probably not so bad, but often copies are
expensive. So we'd like to define a function that takes the points just as
a reference.
~~~
# use std::num::Float;
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
# fn sqrt(f: f64) -> f64 { 0.0 }
fn compute_distance(p1: &Point, p2: &Point) -> f64 {
let x_d = p1.x - p2.x;
let y_d = p1.y - p2.y;
(x_d * x_d + y_d * y_d).sqrt()
}
~~~
Now we can call `compute_distance()`:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
# let on_the_stack : Point = Point{x: 3.0, y: 4.0};
# let on_the_heap : Box<Point> = box Point{x: 7.0, y: 9.0};
# fn compute_distance(p1: &Point, p2: &Point) -> f64 { 0.0 }
compute_distance(&on_the_stack, &*on_the_heap);
~~~
Here, the `&` operator takes the address of the variable
`on_the_stack`; this is because `on_the_stack` has the type `Point`
(that is, a struct value) and we have to take its address to get a
value. We also call this _borrowing_ the local variable
`on_the_stack`, because we have created an alias: that is, another
name for the same data.
Likewise, in the case of `on_the_heap`,
the `&` operator is used in conjunction with the `*` operator
to take a reference to the contents of the box.
Whenever a caller lends data to a callee, there are some limitations on what
the caller can do with the original. For example, if the contents of a
variable have been lent out, you cannot send that variable to another task. In
addition, the compiler will reject any code that might cause the borrowed
value to be freed or overwrite its component fields with values of different
types (I'll get into what kinds of actions those are shortly). This rule
should make intuitive sense: you must wait for a borrower to return the value
that you lent it (that is, wait for the reference to go out of scope)
before you can make full use of it again.
# Other uses for the & operator
In the previous example, the value `on_the_stack` was defined like so:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
let on_the_stack: Point = Point {x: 3.0, y: 4.0};
~~~
This declaration means that code can only pass `Point` by value to other
functions. As a consequence, we had to explicitly take the address of
`on_the_stack` to get a reference. Sometimes however it is more
convenient to move the & operator into the definition of `on_the_stack`:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
let on_the_stack2: &Point = &Point {x: 3.0, y: 4.0};
~~~
Applying `&` to an rvalue (non-assignable location) is just a convenient
shorthand for creating a temporary and taking its address. A more verbose
way to write the same code is:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
let tmp = Point {x: 3.0, y: 4.0};
let on_the_stack2 : &Point = &tmp;
~~~
# Taking the address of fields
The `&` operator is not limited to taking the address of
local variables. It can also take the address of fields or
individual array elements. For example, consider this type definition
for `Rectangle`:
~~~
struct Point {x: f64, y: f64} // as before
struct Size {w: f64, h: f64} // as before
struct Rectangle {origin: Point, size: Size}
~~~
Now, as before, we can define rectangles in a few different ways:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64} // as before
# struct Rectangle {origin: Point, size: Size}
let rect_stack = &Rectangle {origin: Point {x: 1.0, y: 2.0},
size: Size {w: 3.0, h: 4.0}};
let rect_heap = box Rectangle {origin: Point {x: 5.0, y: 6.0},
size: Size {w: 3.0, h: 4.0}};
~~~
In each case, we can extract out individual subcomponents with the `&`
operator. For example, I could write:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64} // as before
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64} // as before
# struct Rectangle {origin: Point, size: Size}
# let rect_stack = &Rectangle {origin: Point {x: 1.0, y: 2.0}, size: Size {w: 3.0, h: 4.0}};
# let rect_heap = box Rectangle {origin: Point {x: 5.0, y: 6.0}, size: Size {w: 3.0, h: 4.0}};
# fn compute_distance(p1: &Point, p2: &Point) -> f64 { 0.0 }
compute_distance(&rect_stack.origin, &rect_heap.origin);
~~~
which would borrow the field `origin` from the rectangle on the stack
as well as from the owned box, and then compute the distance between them.
# Lifetimes
We’ve seen a few examples of borrowing data. To this point, we’ve glossed
over issues of safety. As stated in the introduction, at runtime a reference
is simply a pointer, nothing more. Therefore, avoiding C's problems with
dangling pointers requires a compile-time safety check.
The basis for the check is the notion of _lifetimes_. A lifetime is a
static approximation of the span of execution during which the pointer
is valid: it always corresponds to some expression or block within the
program.
The compiler will only allow a borrow *if it can guarantee that the data will
not be reassigned or moved for the lifetime of the pointer*. This does not
necessarily mean that the data is stored in immutable memory. For example,
the following function is legal:
~~~
# fn some_condition() -> bool { true }
# struct Foo { f: int }
fn example3() -> int {
let mut x = box Foo {f: 3};
if some_condition() {
let y = &x.f; // -+ L
return *y; // |
} // -+
x = box Foo {f: 4};
// ...
# return 0;
}
~~~
Here, the interior of the variable `x` is being borrowed
and `x` is declared as mutable. However, the compiler can prove that
`x` is not assigned anywhere in the lifetime L of the variable
`y`. Therefore, it accepts the function, even though `x` is mutable
and in fact is mutated later in the function.
It may not be clear why we are so concerned about mutating a borrowed
variable. The reason is that the runtime system frees any box
_as soon as its owning reference changes or goes out of
scope_. Therefore, a program like this is illegal (and would be
rejected by the compiler):
~~~ {.ignore}
fn example3() -> int {
let mut x = box X {f: 3};
let y = &x.f;
x = box X {f: 4}; // Error reported here.
*y
}
~~~
To make this clearer, consider this diagram showing the state of
memory immediately before the re-assignment of `x`:
~~~ {.text}
Stack Exchange Heap
x +-------------+
| box {f:int} | ----+
y +-------------+ |
| &int | ----+
+-------------+ | +---------+
+--> | f: 3 |
+---------+
~~~
Once the reassignment occurs, the memory will look like this:
~~~ {.text}
Stack Exchange Heap
x +-------------+ +---------+
| box {f:int} | -------> | f: 4 |
y +-------------+ +---------+
| &int | ----+
+-------------+ | +---------+
+--> | (freed) |
+---------+
~~~
Here you can see that the variable `y` still points at the old `f`
property of Foo, which has been freed.
In fact, the compiler can apply the same kind of reasoning to any
memory that is (uniquely) owned by the stack frame. So we could
modify the previous example to introduce additional owned pointers
and structs, and the compiler will still be able to detect possible
mutations. This time, we'll use an analogy to illustrate the concept.
~~~ {.ignore}
fn example3() -> int {
struct House { owner: Box<Person> }
struct Person { age: int }
let mut house = box House {
owner: box Person {age: 30}
};
let owner_age = &house.owner.age;
house = box House {owner: box Person {age: 40}}; // Error reported here.
house.owner = box Person {age: 50}; // Error reported here.
*owner_age
}
~~~
In this case, two errors are reported, one when the variable `house` is
modified and another when `house.owner` is modified. Either modification would
invalidate the pointer `owner_age`.
# Borrowing and enums
The previous example showed that the type system forbids any mutations
of owned boxed values while they are being borrowed. In general, the type
system also forbids borrowing a value as mutable if it is already being
borrowed - either as a mutable reference or an immutable one. This restriction
prevents pointers from pointing into freed memory. There is one other
case where the compiler must be very careful to ensure that pointers
remain valid: pointers into the interior of an `enum`.
Let’s look at the following `shape` type that can represent both rectangles
and circles:
~~~
struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}; // as before
struct Size {w: f64, h: f64}; // as before
enum Shape {
Circle(Point, f64), // origin, radius
Rectangle(Point, Size) // upper-left, dimensions
}
~~~
Now we might write a function to compute the area of a shape. This
function takes a reference to a shape, to avoid the need for
copying.
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}; // as before
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64}; // as before
# enum Shape {
# Circle(Point, f64), // origin, radius
# Rectangle(Point, Size) // upper-left, dimensions
# }
fn compute_area(shape: &Shape) -> f64 {
match *shape {
Shape::Circle(_, radius) => std::f64::consts::PI * radius * radius,
Shape::Rectangle(_, ref size) => size.w * size.h
}
}
~~~
The first case matches against circles. Here, the pattern extracts the
radius from the shape variant and the action uses it to compute the
area of the circle.
The second match is more interesting. Here we match against a
rectangle and extract its size: but rather than copy the `size`
struct, we use a by-reference binding to create a pointer to it. In
other words, a pattern binding like `ref size` binds the name `size`
to a pointer of type `&size` into the _interior of the enum_.
To make this more clear, let's look at a diagram of memory layout in
the case where `shape` points at a rectangle:
~~~ {.text}
Stack Memory
+-------+ +---------------+
| shape | ------> | rectangle( |
+-------+ | {x: f64, |
| size | -+ | y: f64}, |
+-------+ +----> | {w: f64, |
| h: f64}) |
+---------------+
~~~
Here you can see that rectangular shapes are composed of five words of
memory. The first is a tag indicating which variant this enum is
(`rectangle`, in this case). The next two words are the `x` and `y`
fields for the point and the remaining two are the `w` and `h` fields
for the size. The binding `size` is then a pointer into the inside of
the shape.
Perhaps you can see where the danger lies: if the shape were somehow
to be reassigned, perhaps to a circle, then although the memory used
to store that shape value would still be valid, _it would have a
different type_! The following diagram shows what memory would look
like if code overwrote `shape` with a circle:
~~~ {.text}
Stack Memory
+-------+ +---------------+
| shape | ------> | circle( |
+-------+ | {x: f64, |
| size | -+ | y: f64}, |
+-------+ +----> | f64) |
| |
+---------------+
~~~
As you can see, the `size` pointer would be pointing at a `f64`
instead of a struct. This is not good: dereferencing the second field
of a `f64` as if it were a struct with two fields would be a memory
safety violation.
So, in fact, for every `ref` binding, the compiler will impose the
same rules as the ones we saw for borrowing the interior of an owned
box: it must be able to guarantee that the `enum` will not be
overwritten for the duration of the borrow. In fact, the compiler
would accept the example we gave earlier. The example is safe because
the shape pointer has type `&Shape`, which means "reference to
immutable memory containing a `shape`". If, however, the type of that
pointer were `&mut Shape`, then the ref binding would be ill-typed.
Just as with owned boxes, the compiler will permit `ref` bindings
into data owned by the stack frame even if the data are mutable,
but otherwise it requires that the data reside in immutable memory.
# Returning references
So far, all of the examples we have looked at, use references in a
“downward” direction. That is, a method or code block creates a
reference, then uses it within the same scope. It is also
possible to return references as the result of a function, but
as we'll see, doing so requires some explicit annotation.
We could write a subroutine like this:
~~~
struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}
fn get_x<'r>(p: &'r Point) -> &'r f64 { &p.x }
~~~
Here, the function `get_x()` returns a pointer into the structure it
was given. The type of the parameter (`&'r Point`) and return type
(`&'r f64`) both use a new syntactic form that we have not seen so
far. Here the identifier `r` names the lifetime of the pointer
explicitly. So in effect, this function declares that it takes a
pointer with lifetime `r` and returns a pointer with that same
lifetime.
In general, it is only possible to return references if they
are derived from a parameter to the procedure. In that case, the
pointer result will always have the same lifetime as one of the
parameters; named lifetimes indicate which parameter that
is.
In the previous code samples, function parameter types did not include a
lifetime name. The compiler simply creates a fresh name for the lifetime
automatically: that is, the lifetime name is guaranteed to refer to a distinct
lifetime from the lifetimes of all other parameters.
Named lifetimes that appear in function signatures are conceptually
the same as the other lifetimes we have seen before, but they are a bit
abstract: they don’t refer to a specific expression within `get_x()`,
but rather to some expression within the *caller of `get_x()`*. The
lifetime `r` is actually a kind of *lifetime parameter*: it is defined
by the caller to `get_x()`, just as the value for the parameter `p` is
defined by that caller.
In any case, whatever the lifetime of `r` is, the pointer produced by
`&p.x` always has the same lifetime as `p` itself: a pointer to a
field of a struct is valid as long as the struct is valid. Therefore,
the compiler accepts the function `get_x()`.
In general, if you borrow a struct or box to create a
reference, it will only be valid within the function
and cannot be returned. This is why the typical way to return references
is to take references as input (the only other case in
which it can be legal to return a reference is if it
points at a static constant).
# Named lifetimes
Lifetimes can be named and referenced. For example, the special lifetime
`'static`, which does not go out of scope, can be used to create global
variables and communicate between tasks (see the manual for use cases).
## Parameter Lifetimes
Named lifetimes allow for grouping of parameters by lifetime.
For example, consider this function:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}; // as before
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64}; // as before
# enum Shape {
# Circle(Point, f64), // origin, radius
# Rectangle(Point, Size) // upper-left, dimensions
# }
# fn compute_area(shape: &Shape) -> f64 { 0.0 }
fn select<'r, T>(shape: &'r Shape, threshold: f64,
a: &'r T, b: &'r T) -> &'r T {
if compute_area(shape) > threshold {a} else {b}
}
~~~
This function takes three references and assigns each the same
lifetime `r`. In practice, this means that, in the caller, the
lifetime `r` will be the *intersection of the lifetime of the three
region parameters*. This may be overly conservative, as in this
example:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}; // as before
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64}; // as before
# enum Shape {
# Circle(Point, f64), // origin, radius
# Rectangle(Point, Size) // upper-left, dimensions
# }
# fn compute_area(shape: &Shape) -> f64 { 0.0 }
# fn select<'r, T>(shape: &Shape, threshold: f64,
# a: &'r T, b: &'r T) -> &'r T {
# if compute_area(shape) > threshold {a} else {b}
# }
// -+ r
fn select_based_on_unit_circle<'r, T>( // |-+ B
threshold: f64, a: &'r T, b: &'r T) -> &'r T { // | |
// | |
let shape = Shape::Circle(Point {x: 0., y: 0.}, 1.); // | |
select(&shape, threshold, a, b) // | |
} // |-+
// -+
~~~
In this call to `select()`, the lifetime of the first parameter shape
is B, the function body. Both of the second two parameters `a` and `b`
share the same lifetime, `r`, which is a lifetime parameter of
`select_based_on_unit_circle()`. The caller will infer the
intersection of these two lifetimes as the lifetime of the returned
value, and hence the return value of `select()` will be assigned a
lifetime of B. This will in turn lead to a compilation error, because
`select_based_on_unit_circle()` is supposed to return a value with the
lifetime `r`.
To address this, we can modify the definition of `select()` to
distinguish the lifetime of the first parameter from the lifetime of
the latter two. After all, the first parameter is not being
returned. Here is how the new `select()` might look:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}; // as before
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64}; // as before
# enum Shape {
# Circle(Point, f64), // origin, radius
# Rectangle(Point, Size) // upper-left, dimensions
# }
# fn compute_area(shape: &Shape) -> f64 { 0.0 }
fn select<'r, 'tmp, T>(shape: &'tmp Shape, threshold: f64,
a: &'r T, b: &'r T) -> &'r T {
if compute_area(shape) > threshold {a} else {b}
}
~~~
Here you can see that `shape`'s lifetime is now named `tmp`. The
parameters `a`, `b`, and the return value all have the lifetime `r`.
However, since the lifetime `tmp` is not returned, it would be more
concise to just omit the named lifetime for `shape` altogether:
~~~
# struct Point {x: f64, y: f64}; // as before
# struct Size {w: f64, h: f64}; // as before
# enum Shape {
# Circle(Point, f64), // origin, radius
# Rectangle(Point, Size) // upper-left, dimensions
# }
# fn compute_area(shape: &Shape) -> f64 { 0.0 }
fn select<'r, T>(shape: &Shape, threshold: f64,
a: &'r T, b: &'r T) -> &'r T {
if compute_area(shape) > threshold {a} else {b}
}
~~~
This is equivalent to the previous definition.
## Labeled Control Structures
Named lifetime notation can also be used to control the flow of execution:
~~~
'h: for i in range(0u, 10) {
'g: loop {
if i % 2 == 0 { continue 'h; }
if i == 9 { break 'h; }
break 'g;
}
}
~~~
> *Note:* Labelled breaks are not currently supported within `while` loops.
Named labels are hygienic and can be used safely within macros.
See the macros guide section on hygiene for more details.
# Conclusion
So there you have it: a (relatively) brief tour of the lifetime
system. For more details, we refer to the (yet to be written) reference
document on references, which will explain the full notation
and give more examples.

454
src/doc/guide-ownership.md Normal file
View File

@ -0,0 +1,454 @@
% The Rust Ownership Guide
This guide presents Rust's ownership system. This is one of Rust's most unique
and compelling features, with which Rust developers should become quite
acquainted. Ownership is how Rust achieves its largest goal, memory safety.
The ownership system has a few distinct concepts: **ownership**, **borrowing**,
and **lifetimes**. We'll talk about each one in turn.
# Meta
Before we get to the details, two important notes about the ownership system.
Rust has a focus on safety and speed. It accomplishes these goals through many
"zero cost abstractions," which means that in Rust, abstractions cost as little
as possible in order to make them work. The ownership system is a prime example
of a zero cost abstraction. All of the analysis we'll talk about in this guide
is _done at compile time_. You do not pay any run-time cost for any of these
features.
However, this system does have a certain cost: learning curve. Many new users
to Rust experience something we like to call "fighting with the borrow
checker," where the Rust compiler refuses to compile a program that the author
thinks is valid. This often happens because the programmer's mental model of
how ownership should work doesn't match the actual rules that Rust implements.
You probably will experience similar things at first. There is good news,
however: more experienced Rust developers report that once they work with the
rules of the ownership system for a period of time, they fight the borrow
checker less and less.
With that in mind, let's learn about ownership.
# Ownership
At its core, ownership is about 'resources.' For the purposes of the vast
majority of this guide, we will talk about a specific resource: memory. The
concept generalizes to any kind of resource, like a file handle, but to make it
more concrete, we'll focus on memory.
When your program allocates some memory, it needs some way to deallocate that
memory. Imagine a function `foo` that allocates four bytes of memory, and then
never deallocates that memory. We call this problem 'leaking' memory, because
each time we call `foo`, we're allocating another four bytes. Eventually, with
enough calls to `foo`, we will run our system out of memory. That's no good. So
we need some way for `foo` to deallocate those four bytes. It's also important
that we don't deallocate too many times, either. Without getting into the
details, attempting to deallocate memory multiple times can lead to problems.
In other words, any time some memory is allocated, we need to make sure that we
deallocate that memory once and only once. Too many times is bad, not enough
times is bad. The counts must match.
There's one other important detail with regards to allocating memory. Whenever
we request some amount of memory, what we are given is a handle to that memory.
This handle (often called a 'pointer', when we're referring to memory) is how
we interact with the allocated memory. As long as we have that handle, we can
do something with the memory. Once we're done with the handle, we're also done
with the memory, as we can't do anything useful without a handle to it.
Historically, systems programming languages require you to track these
allocations, deallocations, and handles yourself. For example, if we want some
memory from the heap in a language like C, we do this:
```c
{
int *x = malloc(sizeof(int));
// we can now do stuff with our handle x
*x = 5;
free(x);
}
```
The call to `malloc` allocates some memory. The call to `free` deallocates the
memory. There's also bookkeeping about allocating the correct amount of memory.
Rust combines these two aspects of allocating memory (and other resources) into
a concept called 'ownership.' Whenever we request some memory, that handle we
receive is called the 'owning handle.' Whenever that handle goes out of scope,
Rust knows that you cannot do anything with the memory anymore, and so
therefore deallocates the memory for you. Here's the equivalent example in
Rust:
```rust
{
let x = box 5i;
}
```
The `box` keyword creates a `Box<T>` (specifically `Box<int>` in this case) by
allocating a small segment of memory on the heap with enough space to fit an
`int`. But where in the code is the box deallocated? We said before that we
must have a deallocation for each allocation. Rust handles this for you. It
knows that our handle, `x`, is the owning reference to our box. Rust knows that
`x` will go out of scope at the end of the block, and so it inserts a call to
deallocate the memory at the end of the scope. Because the compiler does this
for us, it's impossible to forget. We always exaclty one deallocations paired
with each of our allocations.
This is pretty straightforward, but what happens when we want to pass our box
to a function? Let's look at some code:
```rust
fn main() {
let x = box 5i;
add_one(x);
}
fn add_one(mut num: Box<int>) {
*num += 1;
}
```
This code works, but it's not ideal. For example, let's add one more line of
code, where we print out the value of `x`:
```{rust,ignore}
fn main() {
let x = box 5i;
add_one(x);
println!("{}", x);
}
fn add_one(mut num: Box<int>) {
*num += 1;
}
```
This does not compile, and gives us an error:
```{notrust,ignore}
error: use of moved value: `x`
println!("{}", x);
^
```
Remember, we need one deallocation for every allocation. When we try to pass
our box to `add_one`, we would have two handles to the memory: `x` in `main`,
and `num` in `add_one`. If we deallocated the memory when each handle went out
of scope, we would have two deallocations and one allocation, and that's wrong.
So when we call `add_one`, Rust defines `num` as the owner of the handle. And
so, now that we've given ownership to `num`, `x` is invalid. `x`'s value has
"moved" from `x` to `num`. Hence the error: use of moved value `x`.
To fix this, we can have `add_one` give ownership back when it's done with the
box:
```rust
fn main() {
let x = box 5i;
let y = add_one(x);
println!("{}", y);
}
fn add_one(mut num: Box<int>) -> Box<int> {
*num += 1;
num
}
```
This code will compile and run just fine. Now, we return a `box`, and so the
ownership is transferred back to `y` in `main`. We only have ownership for the
duration of our function before giving it back. This pattern is very common,
and so Rust introduces a concept to describe a handle which temporarily refers
to something another handle owns. It's called "borrowing," and it's done with
"references", designated by the `&` symbol.
# Borrowing
Here's the current state of our `add_one` function:
```rust
fn add_one(mut num: Box<int>) -> Box<int> {
*num += 1;
num
}
```
This function takes ownership, because it takes a `Box`, which owns its
contents. But then we give ownership right back.
In the physical world, you can give one of your possessions to someone for a
short period of time. You still own your posession, you're just letting someone
else use it for a while. We call that 'lending' something to someone, and that
person is said to be 'borrowing' that something from you.
Rust's ownershp system also allows an owner to lend out a handle for a limited
period. This is also called 'borrowing.' Here's a version of `add_one` which
borrows its argument rather than taking ownership:
```rust
fn add_one(num: &mut int) {
*num += 1;
}
```
This function borrows an `int` from its caller, and then increments it. When
the function is over, and `num` goes out of scope, the borrow is over.
# Lifetimes
Lending out a reference to a resource that someone else owns can be
complicated, however. For example, imagine this set of operations:
1. I aquire a handle to some kind of resource.
2. I lend you a reference to the resource.
3. I decide I'm done with the resource, and deallocate it, while you still have
your reference.
4. You decide to use the resource.
Uh oh! Your reference is pointing to an invalid resource. This is called a
"dangling pointer" or "use after free," when the resource is memory.
To fix this, we have to make sure that step four never happens after step
three. The ownership system in Rust does this through a concept called
"lifetimes," which describe the scope that a reference is valid for.
Let's look at that function which borrows an `int` again:
```rust
fn add_one(num: &int) -> int {
*num + 1
}
```
Rust has a feature called 'lifetime elision,' which allows you to not write
lifetime annotations in certain circumstances. This is one of them. Without
eliding the liftimes, `add_one` looks like this:
```rust
fn add_one<'a>(num: &'a int) -> int {
*num + 1
}
```
The `'a` is called a **lifetime**. Most lifetimes are used in places where
short names like `'a`, `'b` and `'c` are clearest, but it's often useful to
have more descriptive names. Let's dig into the syntax in a bit more detail:
```{rust,ignore}
fn add_one<'a>(...)
```
This part _declares_ our lifetimes. This says that `add_one` has one lifetime,
`'a`. If we had two, it would look like this:
```{rust,ignore}
fn add_two<'a, 'b>(...)
```
Then in our parameter list, we use the liftimes we've named:
```{rust,ignore}
...(num: &'a int) -> ...
```
If you compare `&int` to `&'a int`, they're the same, it's just that the
lifetime `'a` has snuck in between the `&` and the `int`. We read `&int` as "a
reference to an int" and `&'a int` as "a reference to an int with the lifetime 'a.'"
Why do lifetimes matter? Well, for example, here's some code:
```rust
struct Foo<'a> {
x: &'a int,
}
fn main() {
let y = &5i; // this is the same as `let _y = 5; let y = &_y;
let f = Foo { x: y };
println!("{}", f.x);
}
```
As you can see, `struct`s can also have liftimes. In a similar way to functions,
```{rust}
struct Foo<'a> {
# x: &'a int,
# }
```
declares a lifetime, and
```rust
# struct Foo<'a> {
x: &'a int,
# }
```
uses it. So why do we need a liftime here? We need to ensure that any reference
to a `Foo` cannot outlive the reference to an `int` it contains.
## Thinking in scopes
A way to think about lifetimes is to visualize the scope that a reference is
valid for. For example:
```rust
fn main() {
let y = &5i; // -+ y goes into scope
// |
// stuff // |
// |
} // -+ y goes out of scope
```
Adding in our `Foo`:
```rust
struct Foo<'a> {
x: &'a int,
}
fn main() {
let y = &5i; // -+ y goes into scope
let f = Foo { x: y }; // -+ f goes into scope
// stuff // |
// |
} // -+ f & y go out of scope
```
Our `f` lives within the scope of `y`, so everything works. What if it didn't?
This code won't work:
```{rust,ignore}
struct Foo<'a> {
x: &'a int,
}
fn main() {
let x; // -+ x goes into scope
// |
{ // |
let y = &5i; // ---+ y goes into scope
let f = Foo { x: y }; // ---+ f goes into scope
x = &f.x; // | | error here
} // ---+ f & y go out of scope
// |
println!("{}", x); // |
} // -+ x goes out of scope
```
Whew! As you can see here, the scopes of `f` and `y` are smaller than the scope
of `x`. But when we do `x = &f.x`, we make `x` a reference to something that's
about to go out of scope.
Named lifetimes are a way of giving these scopes a name. Giving something a
name is the first step towards being able to talk about it.
## 'static
The lifetime named 'static' is a special lifetime. It signals that something
has the lifetime of the entire program. Most Rust programmers first come across
`'static` when dealing with strings:
```rust
let x: &'static str = "Hello, world.";
```
String literals have the type `&'static str` because the reference is always
alive: they are baked into the data segment of the final binary. Another
example are globals:
```rust
static FOO: int = 5i;
let x: &'static int = &FOO;
```
This adds an `int` to the data segment of the binary, and FOO is a reference to
it.
# Shared Ownership
In all the examples we've considered so far, we've assumed that each handle has
a singular owner. But sometimes, this doesn't work. Consider a car. Cars have
four wheels. We would want a wheel to know which car it was attached to. But
this won't work:
```{rust,ignore}
struct Car {
name: String,
}
struct Wheel {
size: int,
owner: Car,
}
fn main() {
let car = Car { name: "DeLorian".to_string() };
for _ in range(0u, 4) {
Wheel { size: 360, owner: car };
}
}
```
We try to make four `Wheel`s, each with a `Car` that it's attached to. But the
compiler knows that on the second iteration of the loop, there's a problem:
```{notrust,ignore}
error: use of moved value: `car`
Wheel { size: 360, owner: car };
^~~
note: `car` moved here because it has type `Car`, which is non-copyable
Wheel { size: 360, owner: car };
^~~
```
We need our `Car` to be pointed to by multiple `Wheel`s. We can't do that with
`Box<T>`, because it has a single owner. We can do t with `Rc<T>` instead:
```rust
use std::rc::Rc;
struct Car {
name: String,
}
struct Wheel {
size: int,
owner: Rc<Car>,
}
fn main() {
let car = Car { name: "DeLorian".to_string() };
let car_owner = Rc::new(car);
for _ in range(0u, 4) {
Wheel { size: 360, owner: car_owner.clone() };
}
}
```
We wrap our `Car` in an `Rc<T>`, getting an `Rc<Car>`, and then use the
`clone()` method to make new references. We've also changed our `Wheel` to have
an `Rc<Car>` rather than just a `Car`.
This is the simplest kind of multiple ownership possible. For example, there's
also `Arc<T>`, which uses more expensive atomic instructions to be the
thread-safe counterpart of `Rc<T>`.
# Related Resources
Coming Soon.

8
src/doc/guide-pointers.md
View File

@ -408,8 +408,8 @@ test.rs:4 let y = &x;
```
As you might guess, this kind of analysis is complex for a human, and therefore
hard for a computer, too! There is an entire [guide devoted to references
and lifetimes](guide-lifetimes.html) that goes into lifetimes in
hard for a computer, too! There is an entire [guide devoted to references, ownership,
and lifetimes](guide-ownership.html) that goes into this topic in
great detail, so if you want the full details, check that out.
## Best practices
@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ with some improvements:
4. Rust enforces that no other writeable pointers alias to this heap memory,
which means writing to an invalid pointer is not possible.
See the section on references or the [lifetimes guide](guide-lifetimes.html)
See the section on references or the [ownership guide](guide-ownership.html)
for more detail on how lifetimes work.
Using boxes and references together is very common. For example:
@ -780,5 +780,5 @@ Here's a quick rundown of Rust's pointer types:
# Related resources
* [API documentation for Box](std/boxed/index.html)
* [Lifetimes guide](guide-lifetimes.html)
* [Ownership guide](guide-ownership.html)
* [Cyclone paper on regions](http://www.cs.umd.edu/projects/cyclone/papers/cyclone-regions.pdf), which inspired Rust's lifetime system

2
src/doc/guide-unsafe.md
View File

@ -37,7 +37,7 @@ build safe interfaces.
## References
One of Rust's biggest features is memory safety. This is achieved in
part via [the lifetime system](guide-lifetimes.html), which is how the
part via [the ownership system](guide-ownership.html), which is how the
compiler can guarantee that every `&` reference is always valid, and,
for example, never pointing to freed memory.

2
src/doc/index.md
View File

@ -54,9 +54,9 @@ Rust Guides are in-depth looks at a particular topic that's relevant to Rust
development. If you're trying to figure out how to do something, there may be
a guide that can help you out:
* [Ownership](guide-ownership.html)
* [Strings](guide-strings.html)
* [Pointers](guide-pointers.html)
* [References and Lifetimes](guide-lifetimes.html)
* [Crates and modules](guide-crates.html)
* [Tasks and Communication](guide-tasks.html)
* [Error Handling](guide-error-handling.html)

2
src/doc/po4a.conf
View File

@ -11,7 +11,7 @@
[type: text] src/doc/complement-project-faq.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/complement-project-faq.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-container.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-container.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-ffi.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-ffi.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-lifetimes.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-lifetimes.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-ownership.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-ownership.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-macros.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-macros.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-plugin.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-plugin.md
[type: text] src/doc/guide-pointers.md $lang:doc/l10n/$lang/guide-pointers.md