|
|
|
% Lifetimes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rust enforces these rules through *lifetimes*. Lifetimes are effectively
|
|
|
|
just names for scopes somewhere in the program. Each reference,
|
|
|
|
and anything that contains a reference, is tagged with a lifetime specifying
|
|
|
|
the scope it's valid for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within a function body, Rust generally doesn't let you explicitly name the
|
|
|
|
lifetimes involved. This is because it's generally not really *necessary*
|
|
|
|
to talk about lifetimes in a local context; rust has all the information and
|
|
|
|
can work out everything. It's also a good thing because the scope of a borrow
|
|
|
|
is often significantly smaller than the scope its referent is *actually* valid
|
|
|
|
for. Rust will introduce *many* anonymous scopes and temporaries to make your
|
|
|
|
code *just work*.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However once you cross the function boundary, you need to start talking about
|
|
|
|
lifetimes. Lifetimes are denoted with an apostrophe: `'a`, `'static`. To dip
|
|
|
|
our toes with lifetimes, we're going to pretend that we're actually allowed
|
|
|
|
to label scopes with lifetimes, and desugar the examples from the start of
|
|
|
|
this chapter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our examples made use of *aggressive* sugar -- high fructose corn syrup even --
|
|
|
|
around scopes and lifetimes, because writing everything out explicitly is
|
|
|
|
*extremely noisy*. All Rust code relies on aggressive inference and elision of
|
|
|
|
"obvious" things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One particularly interesting piece of sugar is that each `let` statement implicitly
|
|
|
|
introduces a scope. For the most part, this doesn't really matter. However it
|
|
|
|
does matter for variables that refer to each other. As a simple example, let's
|
|
|
|
completely desugar this simple piece of Rust code:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
let x = 0;
|
|
|
|
let y = &x;
|
|
|
|
let z = &y;
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The borrow checker always tries to minimize the extent of a lifetime, so it will
|
|
|
|
likely desugar to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
// NOTE: `'a: {` and `&'b x` is not valid syntax!
|
|
|
|
'a: {
|
|
|
|
let x: i32 = 0;
|
|
|
|
'b: {
|
|
|
|
// lifetime used is 'b because that's *good enough*.
|
|
|
|
let y: &'b i32 = &'b x;
|
|
|
|
'c: {
|
|
|
|
// ditto on 'c
|
|
|
|
let z: &'c &'b i32 = &'c y;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. That's... awful. Let's all take a moment to thank Rust for being a
|
|
|
|
diabetes-inducing torrent of syrupy-goodness.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actually passing references to outer scopes will cause Rust to infer
|
|
|
|
a larger lifetime:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
let x = 0;
|
|
|
|
let z;
|
|
|
|
let y = &x;
|
|
|
|
z = y;
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The borrow checker always tries to minimize the extent of a lifetime, so it will
|
|
|
|
likely desugar to something like the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
// NOTE: `'a: {` and `&'b x` is not valid syntax!
|
|
|
|
'a: {
|
|
|
|
let x: i32 = 0;
|
|
|
|
'b: {
|
|
|
|
let z: &'b i32;
|
|
|
|
'c: {
|
|
|
|
// Must use 'b here because this reference is
|
|
|
|
// being passed to that scope.
|
|
|
|
let y: &'b i32 = &'b x;
|
|
|
|
z = y;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Example: references that outlive referents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alright, let's look at some of those examples from before:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust,ignore
|
|
|
|
fn as_str(data: &u32) -> &str {
|
|
|
|
let s = format!("{}", data);
|
|
|
|
&s
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
desugars to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust,ignore
|
|
|
|
fn as_str<'a>(data: &'a u32) -> &'a str {
|
|
|
|
'b: {
|
|
|
|
let s = format!("{}", data);
|
|
|
|
return &'a s;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This signature of `as_str` takes a reference to a u32 with *some* lifetime, and
|
|
|
|
promises that it can produce a reference to a str that can live *just as long*.
|
|
|
|
Already we can see why this signature might be trouble. That basically implies
|
|
|
|
that we're going to *find* a str somewhere in the scope the scope the reference
|
|
|
|
to the u32 originated in, or somewhere *even* earlier. That's a *bit* of a big ask.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We then proceed to compute the string `s`, and return a reference to it. Since
|
|
|
|
the contract of our function says the reference must outlive `'a`, that's the
|
|
|
|
lifetime we infer for the reference. Unfortunately, `s` was defined in the
|
|
|
|
scope `'b`, so the only way this is sound is if `'b` contains `'a` -- which is
|
|
|
|
clearly false since `'a` must contain the function call itself. We have therefore
|
|
|
|
created a reference whose lifetime outlives its referent, which is *literally*
|
|
|
|
the first thing we said that references can't do. The compiler rightfully blows
|
|
|
|
up in our face.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To make this more clear, we can expand the example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust,ignore
|
|
|
|
fn as_str<'a>(data: &'a u32) -> &'a str {
|
|
|
|
'b: {
|
|
|
|
let s = format!("{}", data);
|
|
|
|
return &'a s
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fn main() {
|
|
|
|
'c: {
|
|
|
|
let x: u32 = 0;
|
|
|
|
'd: {
|
|
|
|
// An anonymous scope is introduced because the borrow does not
|
|
|
|
// need to last for the whole scope x is valid for. The return
|
|
|
|
// of as_str must find a str somewhere *before* this function
|
|
|
|
// call. Obviously not happening.
|
|
|
|
println!("{}", as_str::<'d>(&'d temp));
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shoot!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, the right way to write this function is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
fn to_string(data: &u32) -> String {
|
|
|
|
format!("{}", data)
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We must produce an owned value inside the function to return it! The only way
|
|
|
|
we could have returned an `&'a str` would have been if it was in a field of the
|
|
|
|
`&'a u32`, which is obviously not the case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Actually we could have also just returned a string literal, which as a global
|
|
|
|
can be considered to reside at the bottom of the stack; though this limits
|
|
|
|
our implementation *just a bit*.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# Example 2: aliasing a mutable reference
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
How about the other example:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
let mut data = vec![1, 2, 3];
|
|
|
|
let x = &data[0];
|
|
|
|
data.push(4);
|
|
|
|
println!("{}", x);
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```rust
|
|
|
|
'a: {
|
|
|
|
let mut data: Vec<i32> = vec![1, 2, 3];
|
|
|
|
'b: {
|
|
|
|
// 'b is as big as we need this borrow to be
|
|
|
|
// (just need to get to `println!`)
|
|
|
|
let x: &'b i32 = Index::index::<'b>(&'b data, 0);
|
|
|
|
'c: {
|
|
|
|
// Temporary scope because we don't need the
|
|
|
|
// &mut to last any longer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// NOTE: Vec::push is not valid syntax
|
|
|
|
Vec::push(&'c mut data, 4);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
println!("{}", x);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The problem here is is bit more subtle and interesting. We want Rust to
|
|
|
|
reject this program for the following reason: We have a live shared reference `x`
|
|
|
|
to a descendent of `data` when try to take a *mutable* reference to `data`
|
|
|
|
when we call `push`. This would create an aliased mutable reference, which would
|
|
|
|
violate the *second* rule of references.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However this is *not at all* how Rust reasons that this program is bad. Rust
|
|
|
|
doesn't understand that `x` is a reference to a subpath of `data`. It doesn't
|
|
|
|
understand Vec at all. What it *does* see is that `x` has to live for `'b` to
|
|
|
|
be printed. The signature of `Index::index` subsequently demands that the
|
|
|
|
reference we take to *data* has to survive for `'b`. When we try to call `push`,
|
|
|
|
it then sees us try to make an `&'c mut data`. Rust knows that `'c` is contained
|
|
|
|
within `'b`, and rejects our program because the `&'b data` must still be live!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here we see that the lifetime system is *much* more coarse than the reference
|
|
|
|
semantics we're actually interested in preserving. For the most part, *that's
|
|
|
|
totally ok*, because it keeps us from spending all day explaining our program
|
|
|
|
to the compiler. However it does mean that several programs that are *totally*
|
|
|
|
correct with respect to Rust's *true* semantics are rejected because lifetimes
|
|
|
|
are too dumb.
|