-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13.3k
doc: add a new language design faq #14370
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
Changes from all commits
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 +1,176 @@ | ||
% Rust Design FAQ | ||
|
||
This document describes decisions were arrived at after lengthy discussion and | ||
experimenting with alternatives. Please do not propose reversing them unless | ||
you have a new, extremely compelling argument. Note that this document | ||
specifically talks about the *language* and not any library or implementation. | ||
|
||
A few general guidelines define the philosophy: | ||
|
||
- [Memory safety][mem] must never be compromised | ||
- [Abstraction][abs] should be zero-cost, while still maintaining safety | ||
- Practicality is key | ||
|
||
[mem]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_safety | ||
[abs]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_%28computer_science%29 | ||
|
||
# Semantics | ||
|
||
## Data layout is unspecified | ||
|
||
In the general case, `enum` and `struct` layout is undefined. This allows the | ||
compiler to potentially do optimizations like re-using padding for the | ||
discriminant, compacting variants of nested enums, reordering fields to remove | ||
padding, etc. `enum`s which carry no data ("C-like") are eligible to have a | ||
defined representation. Such `enum`s are easily distinguished in that they are | ||
simply a list of names that carry no data: | ||
|
||
``` | ||
enum CLike { | ||
A, | ||
B = 32, | ||
C = 34, | ||
D | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
The [repr attribute][repr] can be applied to such `enum`s to give them the same | ||
representation as a primitive. This allows using Rust `enum`s in FFI where C | ||
`enum`s are also used, for most use cases. The attribute can also be applied | ||
to `struct`s to get the same layout as a C struct would. | ||
|
||
[repr]: http://doc.rust-lang.org/rust.html#miscellaneous-attributes | ||
|
||
## There is no GC | ||
|
||
A language that requires a GC is a language that opts into a larger, more | ||
complex runtime than Rust cares for. Rust is usable on bare metal with no | ||
extra runtime. Additionally, garbage collection is frequently a source of | ||
non-deterministic behavior. Rust provides the tools to make using a GC | ||
possible and even pleasant, but it should not be a requirement for | ||
implementing the language. | ||
|
||
## Non-`Share` `static mut` is unsafe | ||
|
||
Types which are [`Share`][share] are thread-safe when multiple shared | ||
references to them are used concurrently. Types which are not `Share` are not | ||
thread-safe, and thus when used in a global require unsafe code to use. | ||
|
||
[share]: http://doc.rust-lang.org/core/kinds/trait.Share.html | ||
|
||
### If mutable static items that implement `Share` are safe, why is taking &mut SHARABLE unsafe? | ||
|
||
Having multiple aliasing `&mut T`s is never allowed. Due to the nature of | ||
globals, the borrow checker cannot possibly ensure that a static obeys the | ||
borrowing rules, so taking a mutable reference to a static is always unsafe. | ||
|
||
## There is no life before or after main (no static ctors/dtors) | ||
|
||
Globals can not have a non-constant-expression constructor and cannot have a | ||
destructor at all. This is an opinion of the language. Static constructors are | ||
undesirable because they can slow down program startup. Life before main is | ||
often considered a misfeature, never to be used. Rust helps this along by just | ||
not having the feature. | ||
|
||
See [the C++ FQA][fqa] about the "static initialization order fiasco", and | ||
[Eric Lippert's blog][elp] for the challenges in C#, which also has this | ||
feature. | ||
|
||
A nice replacement is the [lazy constructor macro][lcm] by [Marvin | ||
Löbel][kim]. | ||
|
||
[fqa]: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-April/003815.html | ||
[elp]: http://ericlippert.com/2013/02/06/static-constructors-part-one/ | ||
[lcm]: https://gist.github.com/Kimundi/8782487 | ||
[kim]: https://github.com/Kimundi | ||
|
||
## The language does not require a runtime | ||
|
||
See the above entry on GC. Requiring a runtime limits the utility of the | ||
language, and makes it undeserving of the title "systems language". All Rust | ||
code should need to run is a stack. | ||
|
||
## `match` must be exhaustive | ||
|
||
`match` being exhaustive has some useful properties. First, if every | ||
possibility is covered by the `match`, adding further variants to the `enum` | ||
in the future will prompt a compilation failure, rather than runtime failure. | ||
Second, it makes cost explicit. In general, only safe way to have a | ||
non-exhaustive match would be to fail the task if nothing is matched, though | ||
it could fall through if the type of the `match` expression is `()`. This sort | ||
of hidden cost and special casing is against the language's philosophy. It's | ||
easy to ignore certain cases by using the `_` wildcard: | ||
|
||
```rust,ignore | ||
match val.do_something() { | ||
Cat(a) => { /* ... */ } | ||
_ => { /* ... */ } | ||
} | ||
``` | ||
|
||
[#3101][iss] is the issue that proposed making this the only behavior, with | ||
rationale and discussion. | ||
|
||
[iss]: https://github.com/mozilla/rust/issues/3101 | ||
|
||
## No guaranteed tail-call optimization | ||
|
||
In general, tail-call optimization is not guaranteed: see for a detailed | ||
explanation with references. There is a [proposed extension][tce] that would | ||
allow tail-call elimination in certain contexts. The compiler is still free to | ||
optimize tail-calls [when it pleases][sco], however. | ||
|
||
[tml]: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-April/003557.html | ||
[sco]: http://llvm.org/docs/CodeGenerator.html#sibling-call-optimization | ||
[tce]: https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/81 | ||
|
||
## No constructors | ||
|
||
Functions can serve the same purpose as constructors without adding any | ||
language complexity. | ||
|
||
## No copy constructors | ||
|
||
Types which implement [`Copy`][copy], will do a standard C-like "shallow copy" | ||
with no extra work (similar to "plain old data" in C++). It is impossible to | ||
implement `Copy` types that require custom copy behavior. Instead, in Rust | ||
"copy constructors" are created by implementing the [`Clone`][clone] trait, | ||
and explicitly calling the `clone` method. Making user-defined copy operators | ||
explicit surfaces the underlying complexity, forcing the developer to opt-in | ||
to potentially expensive operations. | ||
|
||
[copy]: http://doc.rust-lang.org/core/kinds/trait.Copy.html | ||
[clone]: http://doc.rust-lang.org/core/clone/trait.Clone.html | ||
|
||
## No move constructors | ||
|
||
Values of all types are moved via `memcpy`. This makes writing generic unsafe | ||
code much simpler since assignment, passing and returning are known to never | ||
have a side effect like unwinding. | ||
|
||
# Syntax | ||
|
||
## Macros require balanced delimiters | ||
|
||
This is to make the language easier to parse for machines. Since the body of a | ||
macro can contain arbitrary tokens, some restriction is needed to allow simple | ||
non-macro-expanding lexers and parsers. This comes in the form of requiring | ||
that all delimiters be balanced. | ||
|
||
## `->` for function return type | ||
|
||
This is to make the language easier to parse for humans, especially in the face | ||
of higher-order functions. `fn foo<T>(f: fn(int): int, fn(T): U): U` is not | ||
particularly easy to read. | ||
|
||
## `let` is used to introduce variables | ||
|
||
`let` not only defines variables, but can do pattern matching. One can also | ||
redeclare immutable variables with `let`. This is useful to avoid unnecessary | ||
`mut` annotations. An interesting historical note is that Rust comes, | ||
syntactically, most closely from ML, which also uses `let` to introduce | ||
bindings. | ||
|
||
See also [a long thread][alt] on renaming `let mut` to `var`. | ||
|
||
[alt]: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2014-January/008319.html |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -23,6 +23,14 @@ li {list-style-type: none; } | |
* [Testing](guide-testing.html) | ||
* [Rust's Runtime](guide-runtime.html) | ||
|
||
# FAQs | ||
|
||
* [Language Design FAQ](complement-design-faq.html) | ||
* [Language FAQ](complement-lang-faq.html) | ||
* [Project FAQ](complement-project-faq.html) | ||
* [Code cheatsheet](complement-cheatsheet.html) - "How do I do X?" | ||
* [How to submit a bug report](complement-bugreport.html) | ||
|
||
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. Libraries are more important imo. 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. It's not about importance, it's about visibility. Really the only link to the libs you need is 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 be surprised if many even knew they existed) 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. Yea with cross crate searching it's not as relevant. 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. Yes please. This has been a pet peeve of mine for so long I'm surprised I never wrote a patch. |
||
# Libraries | ||
|
||
* [The standard library, `std`](std/index.html) | ||
|
@@ -60,13 +68,6 @@ li {list-style-type: none; } | |
|
||
* [The `rustdoc` manual](rustdoc.html) | ||
|
||
# FAQs | ||
|
||
* [Language FAQ](complement-lang-faq.html) | ||
* [Project FAQ](complement-project-faq.html) | ||
* [Code cheatsheet](complement-cheatsheet.html) - "How do I do X?" | ||
* [How to submit a bug report](complement-bugreport.html) | ||
|
||
# External resources | ||
|
||
* The Rust IRC channels on [irc.mozilla.org](http://irc.mozilla.org/) | ||
|
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.
Rust noob here. Not directly related to this guide, but I've been wondering about this and couldn't find any guidelines. It would be great if there was a small section in the tutorial with the pros and cons of these two approaches.
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.
To be clear, @schmee , do you mean the shadowing behavior? What do you want guidance on?
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 mean, when is it possible to redeclare an immutable variable, and when should I in fact declare it mutable?
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.
It's always possible: