-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Immovable types #1858
Immovable types #1858
Changes from all commits
ea780d3
a57a888
7886d57
9a8240e
c235cf2
1783835
ef155ea
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,148 @@ | ||
- Feature Name: immovable_types | ||
- Start Date: 2017-01-09 | ||
- RFC PR: (leave this empty) | ||
- Rust Issue: (leave this empty) | ||
|
||
# Summary | ||
[summary]: #summary | ||
|
||
This add an new built-in trait `Move` which all existing types will implement. Types which do not implement it cannot move after they have been borrowed. | ||
|
||
# Motivation | ||
[motivation]: #motivation | ||
|
||
Interacting with C/C++ code may require data that cannot change its location in memory. To work around this we allocate such data on the heap. For example the standard library `Mutex` type allocates a platform specific mutex on the heap. This prevents the use of `Mutex` in global variables. If we add immovable types, we can have an alternative immovable mutex type `StaticMutex` which we could store in global variables. If the lifetime of the mutex is limited to a lexical scope, we could also have a `StaticMutex` in the stack frame and avoid the allocation. | ||
|
||
The key motivation for this proposal is to allow generators to have "stack frames" which do not move in memory. The ability to take references to local variables rely on those variable being static in memory. If a generator is moved, the local variables contained inside also move, which invalidates references to them. So references to local variables stored inside the generator cannot be allowed. | ||
|
||
Since generators can only move during suspend points we can require that references to local variables do not live across suspend points and so they would not get invalidated. This is still quite restrictive compared to normal functions and will result in code containing unnecessary allocations. If generators are immovable, no such restrictions apply, and references would work like in normal functions. It does however place a burden on the user of those generators to not move them. This isn't a problem for use cases such as awaiting on a future in asynchronous code or iterating over a structure, since the generator would be stored in the stack frame (which is immovable). | ||
|
||
# Detailed design | ||
[design]: #detailed-design | ||
|
||
A new builtin marker trait `Move` is introduced in `core::marker`. All type parameters (including `Self` for traits) and associated types implement `Move` by default. | ||
|
||
If you want to allow types which may not implement `Move`, you would use the `?Move` trait bound which means that the type may or may not implement `Move`. | ||
|
||
A new marker struct `Immovable` is also introduced in `core::marker`. This struct does not implement `Move` and allows users to make composite immovable types. | ||
|
||
You can freely move values which are known to implement `Move` after they are borrowed, however you cannot move types which aren't known to implement `Move` after they have been borrowed. Once we borrow an immovable type, we'd know its address and code should be able to rely on the address not changing. This is sound since the only way to observe the address of a value is to borrow it. Before the first borrow nothing can observe the address and the value can be moved around. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm not sure how useful this is - the main motivation for this RFC is self-referencing generators (or self-referencing structs in general, I assume), and this doesn't apply to them. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is useful for interacting with libraries in other languages that store pointers to Rust values that would be invalidated by those values being moved. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. @nbaraz This is the most important part of this RFC. This is the part which enables immovable types to be moved. This is very useful for generators. In particular you can return generators from functions, since returning is a move. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Any self-referential structure would need to be immediately considered frozen, as it borrows itself from the beginning of its own existence, so the "until it is borrowed" clause would come into effect immediately. This section does concern me for its implications in There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is not possible in Rust though (even with this RFC). You can only borrow values after they have been constructed.
One way to determine this is to ask if you can get a pointer to it in safe Rust. Since In general, we can allow immovable types in an movable container if we either, disallow all methods of accessing the address of the contained immovable types or prevent the type from actually moving once it's inside. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right, I mean in a theoretical future where rust can express a self-referential type, it would need to be aware that it's in an immediate state of borrowed-ness.
Excellent, that's what I was hoping for. To be able to add support for immovables to rental, I need to ensure that anything I return is already considered observed and frozen, since rust itself is unaware of the self-referentiality and might otherwise allow the type to move when it shouldn't. |
||
|
||
Static variables allow types which do not implement `Move`. | ||
|
||
These are the rules to determine if a type implements `Move`: | ||
- Integers, floats, `char` and `bool` are `Move` | ||
- Function types and function pointers are `Move` | ||
- Closures are `Move` if their captured variables are `Move` | ||
- Movable generators are `Move` if all values (including capture variables) which are live during a suspension point are `Move` | ||
- Immovable generators are never `Move` | ||
- The `Immovable` type is never `Move` | ||
- Trait objects are `Move` if they have an explicit `Move` bound | ||
- Struct, enums and tuples are `Move` if all their elements are `Move` | ||
- Existential types (`impl Trait`) are `Move` if their underlying type are `Move` | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I think that this needs to be explicit. If you have:
And then change
Code that assumes that In order to return an existantial + immovable struct, you should have to specify it as being
(I haven't used existantial types, I don't know if The other solution would be to have all existantial types be There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Actually, this example/use case isn't straightforward because returning / passing an argument is a move. But it could interact with placement-new. |
||
- `[T]` and `[T; n]` are `Move` if `T` is `Move` | ||
- `str` is `Move` | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Should probably add "borrowed and mutable references are always |
||
|
||
## Move checking | ||
|
||
We need to ensure that values we have borrowed no longer can be moved. When we borrow a value we can find its address in memory. For example: | ||
```rust | ||
struct Foo { | ||
field: bool, | ||
} | ||
|
||
fn address(v: &Foo) -> usize { | ||
v as *const _ as usize | ||
} | ||
|
||
let a = Foo { | ||
field: true | ||
}; | ||
address(&a) | ||
``` | ||
We can also find the address of `a.field` in our `address` function using this code: | ||
```rust | ||
fn address(v: &Foo) -> usize { | ||
&v.field as *const _ as usize | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
Thus we say that our borrow `&a` observes both `a` and `a.field`. | ||
In general, borrowing a value observes all other values stored inside except for values which are reached using an indirection (for example a reference or a `Box`). If any elements of an array is observed, the entire array is also observed. | ||
|
||
Whenever we are moving an value we emit an error if the type does not implement `Move` and the value could also have been observed. We do the same check for any values stored inside; again ignoring indirections. | ||
|
||
## Immovable types contained in movable types | ||
|
||
To allow immovable types to be contained in movable types, we introduce a `core::cell::MovableCell` wrapper which itself implements `Move`. It works similarly to `Cell` in that it disallows references to the value inside. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I can't think of a scenario where this is actually safe - If a type assumes that it doesn't move in memory because something depends on its address, moving it will always break something. I think that it makes sense for immovable types to only live on the stack or behind pointers, which are always Maybe add an |
||
```rust | ||
#[lang = "movable_cell"] | ||
#[derive(Default)] | ||
pub struct MovableCell<T: ?Move> { | ||
value: T, | ||
} | ||
|
||
impl<T: ?Move> MovableCell<T> { | ||
/// Creates a new MovableCell. | ||
pub const fn new(value: T) -> Self { | ||
MovableCell { | ||
value: value, | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
/// Extracts the inner value. | ||
pub fn into_inner(self) -> T { | ||
self.value | ||
} | ||
|
||
/// Replaces the inner value. | ||
pub fn replace(&mut self, new_value: T) -> T { | ||
mem::replace(self, MovableCell::new(new_value)).into_inner() | ||
} | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
## Implications for language traits | ||
|
||
In order to allow functions to take immovable types and arguments and return them, we need to change `FnOnce`, `FnMut` and `Fn`. A `?Move` bound should be added for the `Args` type parameter to these traits. We also need a `?Move` bound on `FnOnce::Output`, which is backwards incompatible. `FnOnce::Output` was stabilized in 1.12, so hopefully there aren't any code relying on it yet. | ||
|
||
Having a `?Move` bound on `Deref::Target` would be nice. It would allow us to use the dereference operator on `Box`, `Rc`, and `Arc` containing immovable types. | ||
|
||
A `?Move` bound on `IntoIterator::IntoIter` and `Iterator::Self` would also be useful, since you could then use immovable iterators in for-loops. | ||
|
||
I suggest we do a `crater` run to investigate if these breakages are feasible. | ||
|
||
Changing these associated types will be insta-stable. You would be unable to write stable code which would conflict with this proposal. `?Move` bounds would also show up in documentation, although we would be able to filter those out if desired. | ||
|
||
## Allowing immovable types in container types | ||
|
||
`std::boxed::Box`, `std::rc::Rc`, `std::rc::Weak`, `std::sync::Arc`, `std::sync::Weak` will be changed to allow immovable types inside, but will themselves be movable. These can be used to overcome the limitations of immovable types at the cost of an allocation. | ||
|
||
For `Rc` and `Arc` , the function `try_unwrap` would only be allowed on movable types. | ||
|
||
In general, we can allow immovable types in an movable container if we either: | ||
- disallow all methods of accessing the address of the contained immovable types, including references (possible for `Vec`, `HashMap`) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'd call this "rvalue containers" and the other one "lvalue containers". There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That seems confusing, since you can get the address of both l and r-values in Rust. Not that these are important enough to have names. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That's not what happens though, rvalues are converted to lvalues if necessary. |
||
- prevent the type from actually moving once it's inside (the method suitable for `Box`, `Rc`, `Arc`) | ||
|
||
# How We Teach This | ||
[how-we-teach-this]: #how-we-teach-this | ||
|
||
Rust already has the concept of immovable values when a value is borrowed. This adds types where borrows always last until the value is dropped. | ||
|
||
The concept of immovable types is likely familiar to users of C, C++ and C FFIs. | ||
|
||
# Drawbacks | ||
[drawbacks]: #drawbacks | ||
|
||
This adds a new builtin trait and another checker pass. It also requires `?Move` bounds. It may also break existing programs. | ||
|
||
# Alternatives | ||
[alternatives]: #alternatives | ||
|
||
- Instead of having a `Move` trait, we can add final reference types `&final` `&final mut`. Borrowing with these would correspond to borrows of `?Move` types in this RFC. This would require much move invasive changes to the language and may rule out the possiblity of self borrowing types with a `'self` lifetime. | ||
|
||
- Do nothing, but not having this makes generators interact rather poorly with references. | ||
|
||
# Unresolved questions | ||
[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions | ||
|
||
Which associated types can we change in a backwards incompatible way? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Another motivation could be types whose destructors must run - If it is on the stack and can't move from there, can safe code prevent its destructor from running?
This would also require a way to mark types as only place-able on the stack, but immovability is still a requirement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You may still place your "unleakable" type inside a wrapper type which may not run destructors and cause it to leak.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I explained it more clearly here.
The basic idea is adding a way to mark types as immovable + only place-able on the stack. This way they cannot be placed inside a wrapper to be leaked. If the wrapper is completely on the stack (no heap pointer), the unleakable type is not leaked (since
!Move
propagates from members to containing structs). Since it cannot be placed in a heap pointer, RC's and such can't be used to leak them.I don't know if such a marker can be created/enforced.