Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Auto merge of #68122 - Centril:stabilize-transparent-enums, r=petroch…
…enkov Stabilize `#[repr(transparent)]` on `enum`s in Rust 1.42.0 # Stabilization report The following is the stabilization report for `#![feature(transparent_enums)]`. Tracking issue: #60405 [Version target](https://forge.rust-lang.org/#current-release-versions): 1.42 (2020-01-30 => beta, 2020-03-12 => stable). ## User guide A `struct` with only a single non-ZST field (let's call it `foo`) can be marked as `#[repr(transparent)]`. Such a `struct` has the same layout and ABI as `foo`. Here, we also extend this ability to `enum`s with only one variant, subject to the same restrictions as for the equivalent `struct`. That is, you can now write: ```rust #[repr(transparent)] enum Foo { Bar(u8) } ``` which, in terms of layout and ABI, is equivalent to: ```rust #[repr(transparent)] struct Foo(u8); ``` ## Motivation This is not a major feature that will unlock new and important use-cases. The utility of `repr(transparent)` `enum`s is indeed limited. However, there is still some value in it: 1. It provides conceptual simplification of the language in terms of treating univariant `enum`s and `struct`s the same, as both are product types. Indeed, languages like Haskell only have `data` as the only way to construct user-defined ADTs in the language. 2. In rare occasions, it might be that the user started out with a univariant `enum` for whatever reason (e.g. they thought they might extend it later). Now they want to make this `enum` `transparent` without breaking users by turning it into a `struct`. By lifting the restriction here, now they can. ## Technical specification The reference specifies [`repr(transparent)` on a `struct`](https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/reference/type-layout.html#the-transparent-representation) as: > ### The transparent Representation > > The `transparent` representation can only be used on `struct`s that have: > - a single field with non-zero size, and > - any number of fields with size 0 and alignment 1 (e.g. `PhantomData<T>`). > > Structs with this representation have the same layout and ABI as the single non-zero sized field. > > This is different than the `C` representation because a struct with the `C` representation will always have the ABI of a `C` `struct` while, for example, a struct with the `transparent` representation with a primitive field will have the ABI of the primitive field. > > Because this representation delegates type layout to another type, it cannot be used with any other representation. Here, we amend this to include univariant `enum`s as well with the same static restrictions and the same effects on dynamic semantics. ## Tests All the relevant tests are adjusted in the PR diff but are recounted here: - `src/test/ui/repr/repr-transparent.rs` checks that `repr(transparent)` on an `enum` must be univariant, rather than having zero or more than one variant. Restrictions on the fields inside the only variants, like for those on `struct`s, are also checked here. - A number of codegen tests are provided as well: - `src/test/codegen/repr-transparent.rs` (the canonical test) - `src/test/codegen/repr-transparent-aggregates-1.rs` - `src/test/codegen/repr-transparent-aggregates-2.rs` - `src/test/codegen/repr-transparent-aggregates-3.rs` - `src/test/ui/lint/lint-ctypes-enum.rs` tests the interactions with the `improper_ctypes` lint. ## History - 2019-04-30, RFC rust-lang/rfcs#2645 Author: @mjbshaw Reviewers: The Language Team This is the RFC that proposes allowing `#[repr(transparent)]` on `enum`s and `union`. - 2019-06-11, PR #60463 Author: @mjbshaw Reviewers: @varkor and @rkruppe The PR implements the RFC aforementioned in full. - 2019, PR #67323 Author: @Centril Reviewers: @davidtwco The PR reorganizes the static checks taking advantage of the fact that `struct`s and `union`s are internally represented as ADTs with a single variant. - This PR stabilizes `transparent_enums`. ## Related / possible future work The remaining work here is to figure out the semantics of `#[repr(transparent)]` on `union`s and stabilize those. This work continues to be tracked in #60405.
- Loading branch information